Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 35591 - 35600 of 58500 for speedy trial.
Search results 35591 - 35600 of 58500 for speedy trial.
State v. Charles E.
has resulted in damage to the property of another, the trial court may order the child to make
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9456 - 2005-03-31
has resulted in damage to the property of another, the trial court may order the child to make
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9456 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
at sentencing, and he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel because trial counsel did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=48820 - 2014-09-15
at sentencing, and he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel because trial counsel did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=48820 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Supreme Court rule petition 18-03 supporting memo
. The trial court struck the late answer, denied the motion to enlarge time, and entered an order
/supreme/docs/1803memo.pdf - 2018-04-05
. The trial court struck the late answer, denied the motion to enlarge time, and entered an order
/supreme/docs/1803memo.pdf - 2018-04-05
[PDF]
Oral Argument Synopses - November 2010
, the defendant asks the Supreme Court to review whether a new trial must be held in the interest of justice
/sc/orasyn/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=56270 - 2014-09-15
, the defendant asks the Supreme Court to review whether a new trial must be held in the interest of justice
/sc/orasyn/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=56270 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Joel R. Zarnke
, contrary to § 948.05(1)(c), STATS. The trial court concluded that § 948.05 was unconstitutional
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12596 - 2017-09-21
, contrary to § 948.05(1)(c), STATS. The trial court concluded that § 948.05 was unconstitutional
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12596 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
and his trial attorney testified. After considering the witnesses’ testimony, the court denied
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=572612 - 2022-10-04
and his trial attorney testified. After considering the witnesses’ testimony, the court denied
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=572612 - 2022-10-04
COURT OF APPEALS
Kuper’s attorney to testify at trial. We affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 The following facts are taken from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=71555 - 2011-09-28
Kuper’s attorney to testify at trial. We affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 The following facts are taken from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=71555 - 2011-09-28
Milwaukee Police Association v. City of Milwaukee
, and their union, the Milwaukee Police Association, appeal from a determination by the trial court not to compel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3863 - 2005-03-31
, and their union, the Milwaukee Police Association, appeal from a determination by the trial court not to compel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3863 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
the loan. 4 The matter was set for a bench trial, at which Blake appeared without representation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=228697 - 2018-11-27
the loan. 4 The matter was set for a bench trial, at which Blake appeared without representation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=228697 - 2018-11-27
[PDF]
State v. William N. Ledford
it. Before Rodriguez’s trial, however, Ledford sent a notarized statement to Rodriguez’s attorney
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2402 - 2017-09-19
it. Before Rodriguez’s trial, however, Ledford sent a notarized statement to Rodriguez’s attorney
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2402 - 2017-09-19