J-S53022-18 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : ALEX MARTINEZ : : Appellant : No. 375 EDA 2018 Appeal from the PCRA Order January 3, 2018 In the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-09-CR-0002999-2014 BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., OTT, J., and PLATT, J. MEMORANDUM BY OTT, J.: FILED SEPTEMBER 24, 2018 Alex Martinez appeals from the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County, entered January 3, 2018, that denied his first petition filed under the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”).1 In this timely appeal, Martinez raises two claims regarding his alleged inability to effectively communicate with his lawyer due to a lack of a certified translator. We affirm. On September 10, 2014, Martinez pleaded nolo contendere to one count of criminal attempt to commit murder of the first degree, four counts of aggravated assault, one count of possession of instruments of crime (“PIC”), two counts of recklessly endangering another person, two counts of simple ____________________________________________ Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. 1 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541–9546. J-S53022-18 assault, and one count of disorderly conduct.2 During the plea hearing, Martinez was represented by a public defender and communicated with the trial court through a certified Spanish interpreter, who was sworn prior to the proceeding. N.T., 9/10/2014, at 2-3, 14. Martinez was also sworn and confirmed that he was able to communicate effectively through the interpreter. During his plea colloquy, Martinez agreed that the Commonwealth would be able to present sufficient evidence to prove the charges against him beyond a reasonable doubt. Martinez also affirmed that he understood that a nolo contendere plea is still a conviction, the crimes to which he was pleading, the maximum penalties that could be imposed, and his post-sentence rights. Id. at 14-15. He answered affirmatively when asked if he was entering his plea knowingly, voluntarily, intelligently, and of his own free will. Id. After the Commonwealth gave a summary of the facts, id. at 16-19, trial counsel asked Martinez if he had heard the facts as stated by the Commonwealth and if he agreed that the facts were sufficient to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, and Martinez replied affirmatively to both questions. Id. at 19-20. When asked if he had any questions about those facts, Martinez responded negatively and again confirmed that he understood that he was entering a plea of “no contest.” Id. at 19. Sentencing was delayed in order to obtain an evaluation of Martinez’s immigration status. Id. at 24. ____________________________________________ 2 18 Pa.C.S. §§ 901(a), 2702(a), 907(a), 2705, 2701(a)(1), and 5503(a)(1), respectively. -2- J-S53022-18 At his sentencing hearing on November 6, 2014, Martinez again communicated with the trial court through a certified interpreter, who was sworn prior to the proceeding. N.T., 11/6/2014, at 2. Under oath, Martinez stated that he could communicate with the interpreter and could understand what the interpreter said to ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals