Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Christopher D. Robertson 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
christopher-d-robertson
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Christopher D. Robertson

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Jun 27, 2023

State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Christopher D. Robertson, Appellant.

Appellant

Christopher Robertson appealed his convictions for second-degree sodomy, incest, and first-degree sexual misconduct involving his stepdaughters. The trial court admitted evidence of Robertson's prior uncharged sexual acts and testimony about his suicide attempts. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the propensity evidence, as its probative value was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice. The court also found no abuse of discretion in admitting the suicide attempt testimony, as Robertson opened the door to the issue, and such evidence can show consciousness of guilt.