Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Rashod L. James 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
rashod-l-james
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Rashod L. James

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Nov 14, 2023

Rashod L. James vs. State of Missouri

Appellant

Rashod James pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and armed criminal action, then sought post-conviction relief, alleging his attorney coerced him by threatening the death penalty if he went to trial. The circuit court denied relief, finding James' testimony not credible and his motions timely. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the circuit court did not clearly err in finding the pro se and amended motions timely, nor in rejecting the coercion claim, as counsel's advice on potential sentences does not constitute legal coercion.