Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 5/5/1994
Commonwealth v. Wallace
Citations
- 641 A.2d 321
- 433 Pa. Super. 518
- 1994 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1318
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that where necessity of an interpreter was not readily apparent and party never requested an interpreter, trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to sua sponte appoint an interpreter
- finding no abuse of discretion when the record revealed that trial court was not aware the litigant’s hearing impairment affected his ability to comprehend the proceedings
- finding no abuse of discretion when the record revealed that trial court was not aware the litigant’s hearing impairment affected his ability to comprehend the proceedings
- the determination of whether an interpreter is warranted in a particular case is within the sound discretion of the [trial] court
- “The [C]onfrontation [C]lause requires that a defendant be given the opportunity to be physically present at trial, that the defendant be competent to assist in his own defense, and that the defendant understand the language of the forum.” (citation and quotation omitted)
- “A defendant’s ability to use an interpreter encompasses numerous fundamental rights. The failure to understand the proceedings may deny him his right to confront witnesses against him, his right to consult with an attorney, or his right to be present at his own trial.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Wieand, Olszewski, Hoffman
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
13 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Com. of Pa. v. DiazSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2018-03-23· cited 94×
- Commonwealth v. WallsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2010-04-07· cited 74×
- Commonwealth v. PaddenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2001-08-23· cited 47×
- Commonwealth v. NealSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1998-06-24· cited 25×
- In Re GarciaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2009-11-04· cited 13×
- People v. WilliamsAppellate Court of Illinois· 2002-06-10· cited 13×
- Com. v. Ortiz-Pagan, C.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2024-08-20· cited 11×
- People v. JamesColorado Court of Appeals· 1996-06-13· cited 8×
- Commonwealth v. OliverSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1997-05-07· cited 7×
- Ortega, J. v. Henriquez, O.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2025-01-22· cited 1×
- Com. v. Diaz, M.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2018-03-23
- City of Philadelphia v. S.T. PienCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 2019-12-20
- Clay Stuart Gregory v. State of TennesseeCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee· 2025-06-25
Cites
53 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Drope v. MissouriSupreme Court· 1975-02-19· cited 2,695×
- State v. SchaimOhio Supreme Court· 1992-10-28· cited 617×
- Commonwealth v. PettusSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1981-02-05· cited 291×
- Commonwealth v. BakerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-06-17· cited 216×
- Commonwealth v. DurstSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1989-05-30· cited 206×
- Commonwealth v. EdmistonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1993-11-10· cited 196×
- United States of America Ex Rel. Rogelio Nieves Negron v. The State of New YorkSecond Circuit· 1970-10-15· cited 173×
- McMahon v. GreenSupreme Court· 1985-10-07· cited 167×
- Baltierra v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1979-09-19· cited 152×
- Commonwealth v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-10-09· cited 134×
- Commonwealth v. PetrasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1987-11-30· cited 133×
- Martinez Chavez v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 1989-03-01· cited 114×
- Nelson Valladares v. United StatesEleventh Circuit· 1989-05-05· cited 112×
- Commonwealth v. FloydSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1984-11-20· cited 110×
- United States v. Orlando Vasquez CarrionFirst Circuit· 1974-04-01· cited 78×
- Chao v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware· 1992-01-29· cited 77×
- People v. RamosNew York Court of Appeals· 1970-04-09· cited 66×
- Commonwealth v. RollinsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1990-09-13· cited 59×
- United States v. Santano Coronel-Quintana, A/K/A Santana Coronel-Quintana, United States of America v. Inocencio CoronelEighth Circuit· 1985-02-21· cited 54×
- State v. HernandezIdaho Court of Appeals· 1991-11-05· cited 50×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.