People v. Xiong CA5

DISCUSSION

Denial of Request for Appointment of an Interpreter Prior to the commencement of trial testimony, appellant requested the appointment of an interpreter. The court denied the request. Appellant contends the court abused its discretion in failing to appoint an interpreter, in violation of his rights under the United States and California Constitutions.

We use the term “strike” as a synonym for “prior felony conviction” within the meaning of the “three strikes” law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i); 1170.12), i.e., a prior felony conviction or juvenile adjudication that subjects a defendant to the increased punishment specified in the three strikes law. Unless otherwise indicated, all further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

2 Background At the outset of trial proceedings, before any testimony was taken, the prosecutor informed the court that “[Defense counsel] advised Presiding this morning that her client wanted the services of a Hmong interpreter.” The court stated it was aware of appellant’s request for an interpreter, and noted “that there’s been 13 minute orders up to today’s date, none of which included or noted the assistance of an interpreter, as…