Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 35561 - 35570 of 58492 for speedy trial.

[PDF] CA Blank Order
appeals a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of one count of second-degree reckless homicide
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=276818 - 2020-08-11

CA Blank Order
motion in 2010. The court denied the motion in 2012. Smiley first argues on appeal that his trial
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107407 - 2014-01-23

[PDF] CA Blank Order
as a result. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). In reviewing trial counsel’s
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=604683 - 2022-12-29

[PDF] CA Blank Order
was convicted following a jury trial of six counts of delivery of cocaine base. The circuit court sentenced
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=180905 - 2017-09-21

94-CV-225 Abraham Jahnke v. Progressive Northern Insurance Company
limits are invalid for deviating from his rational expectations. They also argue that the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11620 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
incapable of understanding what was transpiring when he entered his plea. He also contends that his trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58293 - 2010-12-27

COURT OF APPEALS
. The “trade terms” were not specified in writing and Dye did not testify at trial, so no evidence was adduced
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32252 - 2008-03-26

[PDF] Christopher A. M. v. Trudie T.
. The trial court found that both parents were fit to take care of Joseph and it was undisputed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4832 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] 94-CV-225 Abraham Jahnke v. Progressive Northern Insurance Company
are invalid for deviating from his rational expectations. They also argue that the trial court should have
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11620 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] State v. Jason R. Kuehn
described as a single act. Kuehn next argues that the trial court failed to consider pertinent factors
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9389 - 2017-09-19