Criminal – Interpreter – Murder

Listen to this article

Where a Superior Court jury convicted a defendant of murder in the first degree, the conviction should be affirmed despite the defendant’s contention that he was deprived of his constitutional right to a competent interpreter to interpret the trial proceeding into his native language.

“On April 5, 2016, the judge found Cantonese interpreter Stephanie Liu (Liu) to be qualified to interpret pursuant to G.L.c. 221, section92, and Mass. R. Crim. P. 41, 378 Mass. 918 (1979). …

“The defendant concedes that he understands ‘some Cantonese.’ He argues, however, that he does not speak Cantonese well enough ‘to be comfortable understanding it at trial without an interpreter translating.’ The judge’s finding that the defendant spoke fluent Cantonese, and understood the proceedings interpreted from English into Cantonese, is well supported by the record. …

“The judge’s denial of the defendant’s motion to remove Liu, and the judge’s decision that Liu was competent, are also well supported by the record and indicate no abuse of discretion. …”

Commonwealth v. Lee (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-176-19) (37 pages) (Gaziano, J.) The cases were tried before David A. Lowy, J., and a motion for a new trial was considered by Timothy Q. Feeley, J., in Superior Court. Russell C. Sobelman on appeal for the defendant; Kenneth E. Steinfield for the commonwealth (Docket No. SJC-12383) (Nov. 12, 2019).

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.