§ 4412. Appointment of interpreter.
(a) Appointment of certified interpreter.--Upon request or sua sponte, if the presiding judicial officer determines that a principal
party in interest or witness has a limited ability to speak or understand English,
then a certified interpreter shall be appointed, unless the certified interpreter
is unavailable as provided in subsection (b).
(b) Appointment of otherwise qualified interpreter.--
(1) An otherwise qualified interpreter shall be appointed by the presiding judicial officer
if a good faith effort was made to obtain a certified interpreter and a certified
interpreter was not reasonably available, as determined by the presiding judicial
officer.
(2) Prior to the appointment of the otherwise qualified interpreter, the presiding judicial
officer, pursuant to general rule, shall state on the record that a certified interpreter
is not available and that the otherwise qualified interpreter:
(i) is readily able to interpret; and
(ii) has read, understands and agrees to abide by the code of professional conduct for
court interpreters for persons with limited English proficiency, as established by
the Court Administrator.
(c) Additional interpreter.--After consideration of the length of the judicial proceeding and the number of persons
with limited English proficiency involved, the presiding judicial officer may appoint,
as provided in subsections (a) and (b), an additional interpreter or provide for additional
interpretation in a manner deemed appropriate by the presiding judicial officer.
(d) Immediate family.--The presiding judicial officer may appoint, as provided in subsections (a) and (b),
an interpreter or provide for additional interpretation, as provided in subsection
(c), for an immediate family member of a principal party in interest.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
13
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 2015–2025 · leading case:
Commonwealth v. Knox, 142 A.3d 863 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
Commonwealth v. Knox, 142 A.3d 863 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
· cites it 3× “42 Pa.C.S. § 4412. "As a general rule, the determination of whether an interpreter is warranted in a particular case is within the sound discretion of the [trial] court.”
H. Hasan v. v. Figaro & SEPTA (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2019).
· cites it 3× “See 42 Pa.C.S. § 4412(a). Where a certified interpreter is not reasonably available after a good faith effort has been made to locate one, the presiding judge may appoint an otherwise qualified interpreter who is readily able to interpret and has read, understands, and agrees to…”
Ling, S. v. Lausch, M. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2022).
· cites it 2× “” Here[,] no evidence was ____________________________________________ 6 Pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 4412, “[u]pon request or sua sponte, if the presiding judicial officer determines that a principal party in interest has a limited ability to speak or understand English, then a…”
Com. v. Pena, R. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2024).
· cites it 2× “: Harmless error exists if the record demonstrates either: (1) the error did not prejudice the defendant or the prejudice was de minimis; or (2) the erroneously admitted evidence was merely ____________________________________________ 6 Appellant additionally argues that…”
Com. v. Colon, J. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
· cites it 2× “In relevant part, 42 Pa.C.S. § 4412 states: (a) Appointment of certified interpreter.”
Com. v. Peralta, J. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 4412(a) (emphasis added). Thus, “[a]s a general rule, the determination of whether an interpreter is warranted in a particular case is within the sound discretion of the trial court.”
J. Mendez v. PBPP (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2018).
“) Petitioner requests that the Court consider section 4412(a) of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. §4412(a), which states: “Upon request or sua sponte, if the presiding judicial officer determines that a principal party in interest or witness has a limited ability to speak or…”
City of Philadelphia v. S.T. Pien (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2019).
“2009); see also Section 4412 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. §4412 (providing that “[u]pon request or sua sponte, if the presiding judicial officer determines that a principal party in interest .”
Commonwealth, Aplt v. Diaz, M. (Pa. 2020).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 4412(a)-(b). This stems from the clear statement of policy by our General Assembly that an interpreter is necessary to secure the rights of a defendant who has a limited ability to speak or understand English: It is hereby declared to be the policy of this…”
Trinh, L. v. Trinh, K. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020).
“” 42 Pa.C.S. § 4412(a). The appointment of an interpreter is within the trial court’s discretion.”
In the Matter of: S.H.D.N., a Minor, 2025 Pa. Super. 163 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2025).
“See also 42 Pa.C.S. § 4412(a) (“Upon request or sua sponte, if the presiding judicial officer determines that a principal party in interest or witness has a limited ability to speak or understand English, then a certified interpreter shall be appointed[.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4412(a) — 8 cases
Com. v. Peralta, J. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 4412(a) (emphasis added). Thus, “[a]s a general rule, the determination of whether an interpreter is warranted in a particular case is within the sound discretion of the trial court.”
J. Mendez v. PBPP (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2018).
“) Petitioner requests that the Court consider section 4412(a) of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. §4412(a), which states: “Upon request or sua sponte, if the presiding judicial officer determines that a principal party in interest or witness has a limited ability to speak or…”
H. Hasan v. v. Figaro & SEPTA (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2019).
“See 42 Pa.C.S. § 4412(a). Where a certified interpreter is not reasonably available after a good faith effort has been made to locate one, the presiding judge may appoint an otherwise qualified interpreter who is readily able to interpret and has read, understands, and agrees to…”
Commonwealth, Aplt v. Diaz, M. (Pa. 2020).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 4412(a)-(b). This stems from the clear statement of policy by our General Assembly that an interpreter is necessary to secure the rights of a defendant who has a limited ability to speak or understand English: It is hereby declared to be the policy of this…”
Trinh, L. v. Trinh, K. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020).
“” 42 Pa.C.S. § 4412(a). The appointment of an interpreter is within the trial court’s discretion.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4412(b) — 1 case
H. Hasan v. v. Figaro & SEPTA (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2019).
“See 42 Pa.C.S. § 4412(a). Where a certified interpreter is not reasonably available after a good faith effort has been made to locate one, the presiding judge may appoint an otherwise qualified interpreter who is readily able to interpret and has read, understands, and agrees to…”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4412(d) — 1 case
H. Hasan v. v. Figaro & SEPTA (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2019).
“See 42 Pa.C.S. § 4412(a). Where a certified interpreter is not reasonably available after a good faith effort has been made to locate one, the presiding judge may appoint an otherwise qualified interpreter who is readily able to interpret and has read, understands, and agrees to…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.