‘PDO request for interpreter 2 days before jury trial troubling’

Superior Court Associate Judge David A. Wiseman last Friday found it troubling the Public Defender’s Office’s request for an interpreter two working days before a felony jury trial.

Wiseman said although PDO did raise the issue of the need for an interpreter for the trial of Aquilino C. Castillo, the court assumed that other pretrial interpreter needs were accommodated.

Wiseman said assistant public defender Benjamin K. Petersburg informed the court on Wednesday that he became aware of a communication problem between him and his client that is claimed to be so poor that he can not proceed and finds it necessary to continue the trial.

The trial of Castillo, a carpenter, was originally set for March 19, 2011. Following PDO’s request, Wiseman ordered that the new jury trial date is July 23, 2012 at 9am.

“The Public Defender’s Office, and in particular, Counsel for Defendant in this matter as well as all counsel practicing before this Court are placed on notice that they must be more diligent in handling future cases in order that this scenario does not repeat itself, a scenario the court will not tolerate in future cases,” said the judge in a written order yesterday.

The Office of the Attorney General charged the 58-year-old Castillo with eight counts of sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree, and eight counts of assault and battery that involved six minors between March to August 2011. He pleaded not guilty.

At motions hearing on Wednesday, assistant attorney general Nicole Driscoll appeared for the government. Petersburg represented Castillo.

Castillo filed three pretrial motions on March 7, 2012 or eight business days prior to trial. The OAG also filed a motion regarding child witness procedures on Tuesday or the day before the motions hearing.

In denying the motions, Wiseman said the pretrial order in this case states that all pretrial motions must be filed 10 business days prior to trial.

Wiseman cited his order on Dec. 30, 2011 in a separate criminal case in which he noted that many lawyers have been very lax with respect to compliance with the court’s pretrial orders.

In that order, Wiseman stressed that he will consider imposing sanctions for violation of pretrial order beginning with the New Year 2012.

The judge said based on that previous ruling and the pretrial order in Castillo’s case, he deems the defendant’s motions untimely and as such will not entertain them.

Subsequent to Wiseman’s ruling denying the motions, Castillo, through his counsel, stated that he wanted a new attorney.

Petersburg stated that he does not believe that defendant has fully understood several issues in this prosecution.

Wiseman felt it necessary to have an interpreter present and continued the matter to 1:30pm that same day, Wednesday, March 14. During the resumption of the hearing, the judge, through an interpreter, explained to Castillo that he was not entitled to select his own attorney appointed unless he has the funds to retain his own lawyer.

Wiseman further found that Castillo is represented by Petersburg, a competent counsel, which satisfies defendant’s constitutional entitlement to effective assistance of counsel.

Petersburg then referred to Castillo’s motion filed on that day, March 14, to appoint an interpreter and continue the jury trial.

Petersburg explained that he does not believe that Castillo has fully understood the ramifications of the charges against him and the case in general due to lack of effective communication and by not having an interpreter.

In his order, Wiseman said he, of course, can not proceed to trial under such circumstances as it would be a violation of Castillo’s due process rights to do so. He rescheduled the trial for July 23, 2012.