People v. Melendez
| Decision Date | 22 March 2007 |
| Docket Number | 28. |
| Citation | 8 N.Y.2d 886,865 N.E.2d 1 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Orlando MELENDEZ, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
During the testimony of a non-English-speaking witness, the trial court required defendant's court-appointed interpreter to stand at the back of the courtroom and interpret for the entire court, rather than solely for defendant. The constitutional issues defendant raises—including the violation of his right to counsel, his right to be present and his right to participate in his own defense—were not presented to the trial court and are thus not preserved for our review. Defendant's remaining contentions regarding alleged inaccurate translation of complainant's testimony and faulty instructions to the grand jury are without merit.
Judge PIGOTT took no part.
Order affirmed, in a memorandum.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Robles
...in interpreting the testimony of two Spanish-speaking witnesses for the jury ( see People v. Melendez, 8 N.Y.3d 886, 832 N.Y.S.2d 893, 865 N.E.2d 1). In any event, we reject that contention. "There is no evidence that defendant's ability to communicate with [defense counsel] was compromised......
-
People v. Reed
...of the owner (see People v. Melendez, 24 A.D.3d 1223, 1223, 805 N.Y.S.2d 914 [4th Dept. 2005], affd 8 N.Y.3d 886, 832 N.Y.S.2d 893, 865 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ; see generally People v. Frumusa, 134 A.D.3d 1503, 1504, 22 N.Y.S.3d 737 [4th Dept. 2015], affd 29 N.Y.3d 364, 57 N.Y.S.3d 103, 79 N.E.3d ......
-
People v. Albert
...by virtue of the interpreter's alleged translation errors (see CPL 470.05 [2] ; People v. Melendez, 8 N.Y.3d 886, 887, 832 N.Y.S.2d 893, 865 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ; People v. Duenas, 120 A.D.2d 978, 978–979, 502 N.Y.S.2d 873 [4th Dept. 1986] ; see also People v. Wong, 256 A.D.2d 724, 724–725, 682......
-
People v. Chiarappa
...he was denied the right to present a defense at his probation revocation hearing ( see People v. Melendez, 8 N.Y.3d 886, 832 N.Y.S.2d 893, 865 N.E.2d 1; People v. Dorn, 71 A.D.3d 1523, 895 N.Y.S.2d 906) and, in any event, we conclude that defendant was " 'afforded [the requisite] opportunit......