« Ind. Courts - Round-about route for an update on the Indiana Court's case management system | Main | Ind. Gov't. - Still more on "Ivy Tech's board broke state law, public access counselor rules" [Updated] »

Monday, April 09, 2007

Ind. Courts - "Court looks at translator rules "

Harold J. Adams of the Louisville Courier Journal has a story this morning (that has since been picked up by other papers) on the oral arguments set to be heard before the Indiana Supreme Court this Thursday in the case of Jesus Arrieta v. State. From the story:

At a hearing this week on a Clark County drug case, the Indiana Supreme Court will consider whether state courts must pay for translators to assist criminal defendants who don't understand English.

The issue has gained importance in Indiana and Kentucky because of the growing number of Hispanics who don't speak English.

Kentucky courts provide state-funded translators throughout all court proceedings for criminal defendants who don't understand English. Indiana courts require defendants to hire translators on their own if they can afford to do so.

"There are no requirements that are imposed by law for court interpreters of foreign language," said Lilia Judson, executive director of State Court Administration in Indiana.

In the case before the Indiana Supreme Court on Thursday in Indianapolis, defendant Jesus Arrieta is demanding that Indiana do what Kentucky does.

Indiana's approach "discriminates against people who don't understand English," Stephen Beardsley, Arrieta's lawyer, said last week. He said it imposes on someone who is presumed innocent "the extra burden" of paying for something that is intrinsic to the legal process.

"We don't pay the judge's salary. We don't pay for the court reporter," Beardsley said of defendants.

See the 2-1 Court of Appeals decision summarized in this Nov. 22, 2006 ILB entry. More from the story:
Judge Nancy Vaidik wrote a dissenting opinion that mirrors Arrieta's position.

"Requiring a non-English-speaking defendant to pay for an interpreter, to me, would be tantamount to requiring any defendant to pay for a courtroom, a bailiff, even a judge," she wrote.

A criminal defendant is involuntarily drawn into the judicial system and "made subject to its immense powers," Vaidik wrote. "To require that defendant to pay merely to be able to understand the words being spoken around him in this system infringes upon basic notions of fairness and due process." * * *

Kentucky courts spent $1.37 million in 2006 on interpreting services, up from $892,700 in 2003. The state uses freelance interpreters but also has hired nine full-time Spanish interpreters for five counties with high-volume criminal dockets: Jefferson, Fayette, Kenton, Boone and Shelby.

In Indiana, interpreters work freelance. Annual costs were not available last week, but in 2005 the state provided interpreters for 14,355 cases, up from 12,557 in 2004, State Court Administration officials said. Complete figures for 2006 are not yet available.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on April 9, 2007 12:40 PM
Posted to Indiana Courts