Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

KENNETH ROBERT DAVIS 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
kenneth-robert-davis
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Civil Litigation
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 KENNETH ROBERT DAVIS

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District / Mar 25, 2021

STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent vs. KENNETH ROBERT DAVIS, Appellant

Appellant

Kenneth Robert Davis was convicted of seven counts of physically abusing his 8-year-old daughter. On appeal, Davis claimed the trial court plainly erred by submitting verdict-directing instructions that were not specific enough to ensure a unanimous jury verdict, given evidence of multiple instances of each type of abuse. The appellate court declined to exercise its discretionary plain error review, finding that Davis failed to demonstrate substantial grounds for believing manifest injustice or a miscarriage of justice resulted, and affirmed the trial court's judgment.