People v. Ramos
Annotate this CaseDefendant was found guilty by a jury of making criminal threats. He chose to represent himself and, prior to opening statements, the trial court removed him from the courtroom for disruptive conduct. The court agreed with defendant that the trial court violated defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel when it involuntarily excluded him from the courtroom without appointing substitute counsel; and (2) the error requires automatic reversal. The court concluded that the denial of counsel during the testimony of a key witness is a per se Sixth Amendment violation that requires reversal without analysis for prejudice or harmless error. Accordingly, the court reversed and remanded for a new trial.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.