Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 4221 - 4230 of 58547 for speedy trial.
Search results 4221 - 4230 of 58547 for speedy trial.
Michael L. Klabacka v. Brenda L. Klabacka
. She challenges the trial court’s decision to allow her attorney to withdraw from representation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15383 - 2005-03-31
. She challenges the trial court’s decision to allow her attorney to withdraw from representation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15383 - 2005-03-31
State v. Shah N. Mian
the judgment of conviction, following a jury trial, for endangering safety by use of a dangerous weapon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15276 - 2005-03-31
the judgment of conviction, following a jury trial, for endangering safety by use of a dangerous weapon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15276 - 2005-03-31
Eugene I. Smith v. M & I Investment Management Corp.
. See Rule 809.17, Stats. The issues are: (1) whether the trial court properly concluded that Smith
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8473 - 2005-10-30
. See Rule 809.17, Stats. The issues are: (1) whether the trial court properly concluded that Smith
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8473 - 2005-10-30
[PDF]
NOTICE
for postconviction relief. Morgan argues that the trial court erred when it: (1) denied his motion to suppress
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34977 - 2014-09-15
for postconviction relief. Morgan argues that the trial court erred when it: (1) denied his motion to suppress
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34977 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
. § 948.22(2) is ambiguous, and that, as a result, the jury was improperly instructed at trial, entitling
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=40739 - 2014-09-15
. § 948.22(2) is ambiguous, and that, as a result, the jury was improperly instructed at trial, entitling
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=40739 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Duran Thomas
is unconstitutional. Further, he submits that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion at sentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2460 - 2017-09-19
is unconstitutional. Further, he submits that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion at sentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2460 - 2017-09-19
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]
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
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
(“OWI”) and the denial of his pre-trial motions for a directed verdict
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=936463 - 2025-04-03
(“OWI”) and the denial of his pre-trial motions for a directed verdict
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=936463 - 2025-04-03
State v. Duran Thomas
ambiguity, the statute is unconstitutional. Further, he submits that the trial court erroneously exercised
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2460 - 2005-03-31
ambiguity, the statute is unconstitutional. Further, he submits that the trial court erroneously exercised
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2460 - 2005-03-31