Solon v. Liu, 2021 Ohio 2030

Defendant Chuanbao Liu (non-English speaker) was charged with domestic violence; a temporary protection order was also issued and later related charges were brought.
At a July 2020 bench trial the court appointed a Chinese interpreter who was sworn with the words: “Do you swear to interpret fairly, justly, and accurately to the best of your ability so help you God?” and the interpreter answered “I do.”
No party objected to the oath or the interpreter’s qualifications at trial; the interpreter translated for Liu and his son throughout testimony and asked clarifying questions when needed.
The court found Liu guilty of domestic violence, sentenced him, and Liu appealed arguing (1) the interpreter was not properly sworn or qualified (claiming structural/plain error) and (2) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object.
The appellate court reviewed under the plain-error standard and Strickland for ineffective-assistance claims, found no evidence the interpreter mistranslated or was unqualified, and affirmed the conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court committed structural or plain error by failing to properly swear/qualify the interpreter	Oath and appointment were sufficient; no contemporaneous objection; therefore review is plain error and record shows accurate interpretation	Oath did not comply with R.C. 2311.14(B) and Evid.R. 604; qualifications not on the record; error was structural or, alternatively, plain	Overruled. No structural error; plain-error review applies; no evidence of untruthful or inaccurate interpretation and no prejudice shown
Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by not objecting to the interpreter’s oath/qualifications	Even if counsel erred, defendant cannot show prejudice; interpreter’s performance was adequate	Counsel was deficient for failing to object to oath/qualifications, undermining defendant’s presence and rights	Overruled. Strickland not satisfied — defendant did not show a reasonable probability of a different outcome

Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279 (structural-error framework)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective-assistance standard)
State v. Fisher, 99 Ohio St.3d 127 (per se prejudice concept for structural errors)
State v. Wamsley, 117 Ohio St.3d 388 (presumption against structural error when defendant had counsel and judge impartial)
State v. Hill, 92 Ohio St.3d 191 (plain-error review when objections not raised)
State v. Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91 (plain-error invoked only on exceptional circumstances)
Campbell v. Rice, 302 F.3d 892 (per se prejudice discussion)
Cleveland v. Mincy, 118 N.E.3d 1163 (discussing structural-error definition)
State v. Machuca, 70 N.E.3d 1180 (application of plain-error where no objection to interpreter)
State v. Rosa, 47 Ohio App.3d 172 (failure to object to interpreter qualifications leads to plain-error review)
State v. Gaspareno, 61 N.E.3d 550 (Sup.R. 88 interpreter selection hierarchy)