Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

BRANT M. WINKLE, Defendant- Missouri Cases

This party appears in the Ott Law Firm Missouri court opinion archive. The cases below connect legal research paths to related practice pages when the opinions map to practical client issues.

Party ID
brant-m-winkle-defendant
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Criminal Law
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 this party profile

These links route party-name research from the court archive into Ott Law Firm practice pages when the associated opinions map to a practical client issue.

Legal Help From The Archive

Need help turning court research into a case plan?

If a party-profile research path points to a current injury, employment, insurance, or litigation issue, Ott Law Firm can review the facts and explain practical next steps.

Cases Involving BRANT M. WINKLE, Defendant-

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District / Aug 27, 2024

STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Respondent vs. BRANT M. WINKLE, Defendant-Appellant

Appellant

Brant M. Winkle appealed his convictions for first-degree murder and armed criminal action following a jury trial. The appellate court dismissed two of Winkle's three points on appeal for failing to comply with Rule 84.04(d)'s briefing requirements. However, the court reviewed the third point, which challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, despite its deficiencies. The court found sufficient circumstantial evidence to support the convictions and affirmed the trial court's judgment.