Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

JOHN ANDREW CALAHAN, 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
john-andrew-calahan-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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 JOHN ANDREW CALAHAN, Defendant-

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District / Dec 10, 2019

STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Respondent v. JOHN ANDREW CALAHAN, Defendant-Appellant

Appellant

John Andrew Calahan appealed his convictions for assault in the second degree and armed criminal action, arguing the trial court plainly erred by denying his motion for a mistrial after the jury initially returned ambiguous verdicts. Calahan contended the remedies applied by the trial court were insufficient to protect his due process right to a fair trial. The appellate court declined plain-error review, finding Calahan failed to demonstrate that the trial court's actions resulted in a manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice, and affirmed the convictions.