Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Douglas Beeson 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
douglas-beeson
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Douglas Beeson

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Mar 4, 2025

State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Douglas Beeson, Appellant.

Appellant

Douglas Beeson was convicted of multiple offenses, including possession of a controlled substance, after contraband was found in his vehicle. He appealed the denial of his motion to suppress this evidence, arguing the automobile exception to the warrant requirement did not apply because his vehicle was immobile. The Eastern District of Missouri affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that the automobile exception applies when there is probable cause to search, even if the vehicle is not readily mobile, due to the reduced expectation of privacy in vehicles.