Commonwealth v. Cameron
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Defendant was found guilty on two indictments charging rape. During trial, the Commonwealth offered in evidence a laboratory report regarding the presence of seminal residue on the complainant’s underwear. DNA testing performed before trial indicated the presence of two male sources of the seminal residue, and testing as to the primary source excluded Defendant. A Commonwealth expert described the secondary source as neither including nor excluding Defendant. After Defendant was convicted, he unsuccessfully filed a motion for a new trial. Thereafter, Defendant filed a motion to amend and reconsider his motion for a new trial, arguing that independent testing revealed that the second source was, in fact, female DNA to which Defendant was conclusively excluded as a possible contributor. A superior court judge denied Defendant’s motion, and the Appeals Court affirmed. The Supreme Judicial Court reversed, holding that Defendant must be given a new trial, as had the new evidence been available at trial, there was a substantial risk that the jury would have reached a different conclusion.
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.