Appeals court considers whether 'bad acts' testimony required limiting instruction in Ortega appeal

A three-judge panel of the Appeals Court on Sept. 15, 2025, heard oral argument in Commonwealth v. Ortega over whether admission of extensive uncharged "bad acts" testimony without a jury limiting instruction created a substantial risk of miscarriage of justice.

The defense, represented by Attorney Andrew Power, told the panel the trial judge failed to give a requested limiting instruction on other-bad-act testimony and that omission was prejudicial given the volume of testimony alleging repeated abuse. "The failure to give the bad act instruction really caused the substantial risk of miscarriage of justice in this case," Power said.

The heart of Power's appeal is a Randolph claim — the standard for review of waived trial errors — arguing four elements: error, prejudice, material influence on the verdict, and that counsel's failure to secure the instruction was not strategic. Power told the court the trial judge had said some of the testimony was admissible for limited purposes but that the promised limiting instruction was not given.

Power described the volume of uncharged allegations…