Commonwealth v. Diaz, M. , 199 A.3d 347 ( 2018 )

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MIDDLE DISTRICT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : No. 433 MAL 2018
:
Petitioner :
: Petition for Allowance of Appeal from
: the Order of the Superior Court
v. :
:
:
MIGUEL DIAZ, :
:
Respondent :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 19th day of December, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal
is GRANTED. The issues as stated by Petitioner are:
1) As a matter of first impression, did the Superior Court err as a matter of law
in holding that counsel’s failure to obtain, object to the lack of, or ascertain
the need for an interpreter on the first day of trial constitutes per se prejudice
under [United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (1984)], rather than applying
the [Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)/Commonwealth v.
Pierce, 527 A.2d 973 (1987)] ineffectiveness standard?
2) Did the Superior Court err in applying Cronic, instead of the Strickland/
Pierce ineffectiveness standard, on the claim of counsel’s ineffectiveness
for failing to obtain or object to the lack of an interpreter on the first day of
trial under the circumstances of the instant case, where the record clearly
reflected that [Diaz], including by his own admissions, spoke and
understood English as a second language, and, where, [Diaz] himself
confirmed that on the first day of trial[,] he requested an interpreter only for
his own testimony and his request was granted?