Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 4221 - 4230 of 58509 for speedy trial.
Search results 4221 - 4230 of 58509 for speedy trial.
State v. Randolph P. Haushalter
of an intoxicant (OWI), contrary to § 346.63(1)(a), Stats. Haushalter argues that the trial court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15123 - 2005-03-31
of an intoxicant (OWI), contrary to § 346.63(1)(a), Stats. Haushalter argues that the trial court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15123 - 2005-03-31
State v. Randolph P. Haushalter
of an intoxicant (OWI), contrary to § 346.63(1)(a), Stats. Haushalter argues that the trial court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15125 - 2005-03-31
of an intoxicant (OWI), contrary to § 346.63(1)(a), Stats. Haushalter argues that the trial court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15125 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Dennis L. Steele
trial. He contends that 1 This appeal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13267 - 2017-09-21
trial. He contends that 1 This appeal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13267 - 2017-09-21
State v. Randolph P. Haushalter
of an intoxicant (OWI), contrary to § 346.63(1)(a), Stats. Haushalter argues that the trial court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15124 - 2005-03-31
of an intoxicant (OWI), contrary to § 346.63(1)(a), Stats. Haushalter argues that the trial court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15124 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED March 13, 2007 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Court o...
to a new trial because: (1) of newly-discovered evidence; and (2) his attorneys, both trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28401 - 2007-03-12
to a new trial because: (1) of newly-discovered evidence; and (2) his attorneys, both trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28401 - 2007-03-12
State v. Roger P. Barber
.[1] He also appeals from the trial court’s orders denying his motions for postconviction relief
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13447 - 2005-03-31
.[1] He also appeals from the trial court’s orders denying his motions for postconviction relief
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13447 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
and Brash, JJ. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Jeffrey Harris, pro se, appeals from a trial court order denying his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=160938 - 2017-09-21
and Brash, JJ. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Jeffrey Harris, pro se, appeals from a trial court order denying his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=160938 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Steven Buckingham
Buckingham also appeals from the trial court’s order denying his postconviction motions for plea withdrawal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12409 - 2014-09-15
Buckingham also appeals from the trial court’s order denying his postconviction motions for plea withdrawal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12409 - 2014-09-15
State v. Steven Buckingham
, Stats.[1] Buckingham also appeals from the trial court’s order denying his postconviction motions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12409 - 2005-03-31
, Stats.[1] Buckingham also appeals from the trial court’s order denying his postconviction motions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12409 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
(“OWI”) and the denial of his pre-trial motions for a directed verdict
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=936463 - 2025-04-03
(“OWI”) and the denial of his pre-trial motions for a directed verdict
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=936463 - 2025-04-03