Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Everett Ray Graham 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
everett-ray-graham
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Everett Ray Graham

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Jun 12, 2018

State of Missouri vs. Everett Ray Graham

Respondent

Everett Graham appealed his conviction for failing to register as a sex offender in Missouri, arguing the State did not prove he knowingly failed to register after moving from Iowa. Graham had previously been notified by Iowa that his ten-year registration period had expired. The appellate court reversed the conviction, holding that the State failed to present any evidence that Graham knowingly had an obligation to register in Missouri, thus failing to prove the requisite mental state for the offense. The court reaffirmed that a "knowing" mental state is required for this offense.