Here are some typos I've collected from trial transcripts and briefs:

Q. You mentioned LSD that you had taken some LSD that day.
A. Right.
Q. Did you take drugs often?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Still using drugs?
A. No, I don't.
Q. Besides LSD, did you use any other drugs at that time?
A. Yes, I used Perdner, almost everything ....
During the course of the trial, testimony was adduced that tended to show, inter alia, that Defendant had an altercation with one of the complainants as a result of Defendant having confronted the complainant, Campbell, as a law enforcement officer for the purpose of inquiring into the reasons for the complainant's alleged erotic driving behavior.
That type of procedure is not proper, it's not within the Rules of Evidence, and it cannot be condomed by this Court, nor would it be condomed I don't think by the Appellate Court.
Basic to our system of criminal justice is the principle that a person excused of a crime is presumed to be innocent.
Certainly if ever there was a teacher in the anals of the history of the State of Michigan that does not belong in the school room, Mr. Nelson is a classic example.
A recent Michigan Court of Appeals, Detroit vs. Whalings, Inc. 43 Mich. App. 1, analized the principles involved...
...5. Mr. Kelly went for his physical examination in late December 1971, and passed that examination.
7. On January 4, 1970, Mr. Kelly entered the hospital; he died on January 29, 1970.
JUDGE'S CERTIFICATE OF CONCISE STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS hereby certify that after due notice I have settled the attached...statement.... _
THE COURT: Well, that's my job, to be an empire.