Commonwealth v. Jose Ramos, SJC-12678

Supreme Judicial Court · May 11, 2026

0:00/27m

27:47

0:00

5:00

10:00

15:00

20:00

27:47

Defense opening: two grounds for new trial

Presentation

0:08 → 0:56(49s)

Michael Tempowski, counsel for Jose Ramos, opened arguing Ramos is entitled to a new trial for two independent reasons: (1) the trial court barred prior-act ('adjutant') evidence about the victim that would have been admissible and not subject to rebuttal; and (2) trial counsel withdrew the requested sudden-combat manslaughter instruction, creating a substantial likelihood of miscarriage of justice. He framed the first as an evidentiary-admissibility issue.

Keywords:

Speakers:

Oral argument before the Supreme Judicial Court on Jose Ramos's appeal alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and erroneous withdrawal of a sudden-combat manslaughter instruction; justices questioned admissibility of prior-act evidence and whether counsel's tactical choice was manifestly unreasonable (date not specified).

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Transcript

Unlock the transcript with a paid subscription