The Indiana Supreme Court issued a decision in the case of Ponce v. State (pdf) overturning a conviction based on a plea agreement where the defendant in Elkhart County did not speak English and was advised of his rights through a faulty translation.
The Supreme Court found that the translation was so inadequate that the defendant could not be said to have meaningfully understood and waived his rights. It further observed that meaningful access to the courts requires that the accused actually be able to understand what’s being said.
This is an issue confronted by all state courts to one degree or another. It’s my understanding that translators are engaged by the courts on a county-by-county basis. Seems like the General Assembly might consider establishing (and funding) a state translators’ office administered by the Indiana Supreme Court which would certify the translators as: a) being competent translators; and b) having a working understanding of the judicial process such that they can communicate those concepts to a defendant. Those translators would then be made available to the state courts in the various counties. Some courts and languages could justify a more or less permanent assignment to one county or another. Others don’t have the volume, but if the demand was aggregated statewide the result might be a more efficient allocation of translator resources.
exhoosier says
This legislature? When los cerdos fly.
Tom says
Time to start brushing up on my Klingon, Dothraki or Quenya.
Rick says
I would similarly like to see a statewide Medical Examiner to assist local governments in performing autopsies.
wimsey says
It’s worth pointing out that the poor translation at issue in this case took place in 1999, and the Ind. Supreme Court has, in the intervening years, established a certified court translator program.