Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

JAMES L. LANCASTER, 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
james-l-lancaster-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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 JAMES L. LANCASTER, Defendant-

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District / Aug 26, 2024

STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Respondent v. JAMES L. LANCASTER, Defendant-Appellant

Appellant

James L. Lancaster appealed his conviction for third-degree domestic assault, arguing the trial court erred by admitting only a portion of a home surveillance video, thereby violating the rule of completeness. The video admitted depicted the entire assault, while Lancaster sought to introduce a longer video to impeach the victim's credibility. The Southern District of the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, finding no error in the admission of the video. The court held that the rule of completeness did not apply because the additional video was not part of a greater whole related to the charged conduct, and was sought only for impeachment.