St. Louis Counsel
Ott Law Firm

Case Authority

state v boyd 659 sw3d 914

This authority appears in 36 citation records in the Ott Law Firm Missouri court opinion archive.

Canonical ID
case:state-v-boyd-659-sw3d-914
Citation Sample
State v. Boyd, 659 S.W.3d 914
Cases Shown
36
Archive note: This is a summary of public court records and is not legal advice. Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source. This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.

Related Practice Pages

Practical guidance connected to cases citing this authority

These links route legal-research traffic from this authority profile into Ott Law Firm practice pages when the authority itself or the cited cases map to a practical client issue.

Criminal LawCivil LitigationCorporate LawEmployment Law

Legal Help From The Archive

Need help with an issue tied to state v boyd 659 sw3d 914?

This authority profile is public case-law research. If the authority connects to your claim or dispute, Ott Law Firm can help evaluate evidence, deadlines, and next steps.

Free Criminal Law ConsultationCall About A Criminal Law Claim

Citation Treatment

cited

34

followed

2

Cases Citing state v boyd 659 sw3d 914

Showing up to 50 opinion records linked to this authority.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Jan 13, 2026

State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Christopher M. Grimes, Appellant.

cited

Citation: State v. Boyd, 659 S.W.3d 914

The court affirmed the defendant's conviction on two counts of sexual abuse in the first degree, finding sufficient evidence that the defendant applied physical force that overcame the victim's reasonable resistance, constituting forcible compulsion. The defendant's arguments that the state's evidence was insufficient to prove forcible compulsion were rejected.

Criminal Law