Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Justin Ray Webb 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
justin-ray-webb
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Justin Ray Webb

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Dec 26, 2018

State of Missouri vs. Justin Ray Webb

Respondent

Justin Webb appealed his convictions for second-degree felony murder and first-degree child endangerment, for which he received consecutive sentences of thirty and seven years. Webb challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, the admission of post-mortem photographs, the admission of the victim's out-of-court statements to teachers, and his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment due to a longer sentence than his co-perpetrator. The appellate court affirmed, finding sufficient evidence, declining to review the photo claim due to lack of exhibits, holding the victim's statements were not testimonial, and denying the sentencing claim for lack of preservation.