Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Supreme Judicial Court hears appeal in Jose Ramos case over withheld evidence and withdrawn instruction
Summary
In oral argument, defense counsel Michael Tempowski urged the Supreme Judicial Court to grant Jose Ramos a new trial, saying trial counsel failed to seek admissible prior-act evidence about the victim and withdrew a sudden-combat manslaughter instruction; the Commonwealth countered that the judge credited counsel and that the case facts and Rule 403 would likely have excluded the evidence.
Michael Tempowski, attorney for Jose Ramos, told the Supreme Judicial Court that Ramos is "entitled to a new trial for 2 independent reasons": the trial court did not admit prior-act evidence about the victim and trial counsel withdrew a requested sudden-combat manslaughter instruction, conduct Tempowski said created a substantial likelihood of a miscarriage of justice.
The exchange unfolded during oral argument before the court. Tempowski argued the prior-act evidence was wrongly excluded under the governing admissibility framework and that that exclusion prevented the defense from placing evidence before the jury that would have made the victim's alleged history of violence relevant to a self-defense theory. "It's actually harder for the Commonwealth to introduce counteraction evidence than it is for the defendant to introduce," Tempowski said, invoking case-law…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
