Jean O. Duvere v. State of Rhode Island, 151 A.3d 314

In 1997 Duvere (native of Haiti, long-time U.S. resident) was arrested after police found ~2 bricks of marijuana in his trunk and charged with possession of 1–5 kg with knowledge and intent under § 21-28-4.01.1.
He posted bail, failed to appear in 1998, and a warrant issued; he was arrested on that warrant and returned to Rhode Island in 2009.
On July 15, 2009, Duvere pled nolo contendere and received a 10-year sentence (18 months to serve, remainder suspended with probation). No Haitian‑Creole interpreter was present; Duvere did not request one and stated he could understand and speak English.
Duvere later made several pro se court appearances (seeking sentence corrections/credits) without requesting an interpreter; the same hearing justice presided over those appearances.
In 2013 Duvere filed a postconviction‑relief application arguing his plea was not knowing and voluntary because no Haitian‑Creole interpreter was provided and he had poor English; the hearing justice held an evidentiary hearing (with an interpreter) and denied relief, finding Duvere not credible and concluding he understood English.
Duvere appealed; the Supreme Court affirmed, giving deference to the hearing justice’s factual findings and concluding the record showed no need for an interpreter or prejudice from its absence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Duvere’s nolo contendere plea was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary because no Haitian‑Creole interpreter was provided	Duvere: poor English prevented a knowing, voluntary plea and the court should have appointed an interpreter under § 8‑19‑1	State: record shows Duvere repeatedly said he understood English, answered questions, and did not request an interpreter; hearing justice properly exercised discretion	Court held plea was valid; no error in refusing to appoint an interpreter and no prejudice shown
Whether hearing justice’s credibility findings should be disturbed on appeal	Duvere: his testimony that he could not understand English was credible and warrants vacatur	State: hearing justice observed demeanor, found original counsel credible, and relied on long U.S. residence and pro se appearances	Court deferred to hearing justice’s factual findings and affirmed denial of postconviction relief

State v. Ibrahim, 862 A.2d 787 (R.I. 2004) (court may appoint interpreter when needed; long residence/employment can support finding no interpreter required)
Reyes v. State, 141 A.3d 644 (R.I. 2016) (Rule 11 requirements and deference to interpreter appointment discretion)
State v. Lopez-Navor, 951 A.2d 508 (R.I. 2008) (courts have large discretion in selection and appointment of interpreters)
Camacho v. State, 58 A.3d 162 (R.I. 2013) (applicant bears burden to prove postconviction relief by a preponderance)
Lamoureux v. State, 93 A.3d 958 (R.I. 2014) (standards for postconviction relief and appellate review)
Merida v. State, 93 A.3d 545 (R.I. 2014) (de novo review for postconviction decisions involving mixed questions of law and fact)
Neufville v. State, 13 A.3d 607 (R.I. 2011) (appellate review deference to hearing justice’s factual findings)