Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

RAMSEY KADE COSTA 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
ramsey-kade-costa
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 RAMSEY KADE COSTA

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District / Date unavailable

STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent v. RAMSEY KADE COSTA, Appellant

Appellant

Ramsey Kade Costa was convicted of two counts of first-degree statutory sodomy and three counts of first-degree child molestation. On appeal, Costa challenged the sufficiency of the evidence for the sodomy convictions and the admission of propensity witness testimony. The appellate court reversed the statutory sodomy convictions, finding insufficient evidence to prove "deviate sexual intercourse" as defined by statute. However, it affirmed the child molestation convictions, concluding that while the trial court erred in admitting some propensity testimony, the error was not outcome-determinative.