Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Markel Vasquez 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
markel-vasquez
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Markel Vasquez

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Mar 18, 2025

Markel Vasquez, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.

Appellant

Markel Vasquez appealed the motion court's denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. Vasquez claimed his plea counsel misadvised him that he would not serve a prison sentence if his probation, granted after a guilty plea to robbery, was revoked. The motion court denied relief, finding Vasquez's claim refuted by the record and his testimony not credible. The appellate court affirmed, holding that a post-revocation prison term is a collateral consequence of a guilty plea, and the record did not support the claim of affirmative misadvice by counsel.