BILL NUMBER: AB 618 AMENDED
BILL TEXT
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 10, 2011
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 31, 2011
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Furutani
FEBRUARY 16, 2011
An act to add Article 4.5 (commencing with Section 68570) to
Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Government Code, relating to the courts.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 618, as amended, Furutani. Court interpreters.
Existing law requires, when a witness is incapable of
understanding the English language or expressing himself or herself
in the English language so as to be understood directly by counsel,
court, and jury, an interpreter to be sworn to interpret for him or
her. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to conduct a study of
language and interpreter use and need in court proceedings, with
commentary, and to report its findings and recommendations to the
Governor and to the Legislature every 5 years. Existing law requires
that this study serve as the basis for determining the need to
establish interpreter programs and certification and for establishing
these programs and examinations through the normal budgetary
process.
This bill would enact the California Language Access Bill of
Rights. The bill would provide that a person who is unable
to understand English, and who is charged with a crime, has the right
to a competent interpreter to provide exclusive, ongoing, and
simultaneous translation services throughout any proceeding at which
the person is physically present state the intent of
the Legislature to clarify the circumstances in which a person who is
unable to understand English, and who is charged with a crime, has
the right to an exclusive interpreter provided by the court .
The bill would provide that a person who is charged with a crime has
a right to a hearing at any point before or during a
proceeding, if there is a factual basis for doing so, to determine
determination of the competence of an interpreter
, or if any person's rights would be prejudiced by the use
of a noncertified interpreter at any time during a
proceeding if, on the basis of the interpreter's provision of
interpreter services during a criminal proceeding, there is good
cause to question whether the continued use of the interpreter in
the proceeding may prejudice the rights of any person such that it
would not be in the interest of justice or efficiency for the
interpreter to continue . The bill would prohibit a
non interpreter noninterpreter staff person of
the court, or any person employed by the sheriff,
probation department, or any other local government entity
prosecutor, jail, or corrections department of the
prosecuting city or county from providing
interpreter services at any time, unless he or she is a
certified interpreter during a proceeding. The bill
would permit the rights provided pursuant to these provisions only to
be waived expressly by the person charged if the waiver is
affirmatively shown to be intelligent and voluntary . The bill
also would set forth legislative findings and declarations relating
to ensuring an adequate supply of court interpreters without
sacrificing essential standards for certification.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Legislature hereby finds and declares all of the
following:
(a) California is one of the most linguistically diverse states in
the nation. As language diversity in California continues to
increase, there continues to be a decline in the availability of
qualified court interpreters in the state courts. As a result, the
state faces a persistent shortage of professionally certified
interpreters, which threatens the state's ability to ensure access to
justice and equality under the law for all court users, including
parties, witnesses, and victims.
(b) Court interpreter services in criminal matters are a right --
not a privilege -- guaranteed by the United States and California
Constitutions and statutory law. These services not only assist the
defendant in a criminal matter, but also witnesses and victims,
prosecutors, defense attorneys, and law enforcement.
(c) The consequences of not having sufficiently qualified
interpreters in the courts are well documented and can lead to costly
mistakes, not only for the parties to a proceeding resulting in
wrongful or erroneous decisions, but also the court system in terms
of delay, waste, and duplication of proceedings relating to these
avoidable errors.
(d) Meeting the legal equivalence standard in interpreting court
proceedings is an extremely difficult task that demands a high level
of language proficiency in two languages as well as specialized
cognitive and interpreting skills. Individuals who possess the
necessary proficiency and skill level to be court interpreters are a
scarce resource. Ensuring an adequate supply of court interpreters
can and must be accomplished without sacrificing essential standards
for certification.
SEC. 2. Article 4.5 (commencing with Section 68570) is added to
Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Government Code, to read:
Article 4.5. California Language Access Bill of Rights
68570. This article shall be known, and may be cited, as the
California Language Access Bill of Rights.
68571. (a) A person who is unable to understand English, and who
is charged with a crime, has the right to a competent interpreter to
provide exclusive, ongoing, and simultaneous translation services
throughout any proceeding at which the person is physically present.
For purposes of this subdivision, "exclusive" means a separate
interpreter during each proceeding who is not shared with any other
party, witness, or person.
(b) A person who is charged with a crime has a right to a hearing
at any point before or during a proceeding, if there is a factual
basis for having the hearing, to determine the competence of an
interpreter, or if any person's rights would be prejudiced by the use
of a noncertified interpreter.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, a
noninterpreter staff person of the court, or the sheriff, probation
department, or any other local government entity shall not provide
interpreter services at any time unless he or she is a certified
interpreter.
68571. (a) It is the intent of the Legislature to clarify the
circumstances in which a person who is unable to understand English,
and who is charged with a crime, has the right to an exclusive
interpreter provided by the court.
(b) A person who is charged with a crime has a right to a
determination of the competence of an interpreter at any time during
a proceeding if, on the basis of the interpreter's provision of
interpreter services during a criminal proceeding, there is good
cause to question whether the continued use of the interpreter in the
proceeding may prejudice the rights of any person such that it would
not be in the interest of justice or efficiency for the interpreter
to continue.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, a
noninterpreter staff person of the court, or any person employed by
the sheriff, probation department, prosecutor, jail, or corrections
department of the prosecuting city or county shall not provide
interpreter services during a proceeding under this section. This
subdivision shall not be construed to negate or modify the
circumstances under which a court has the authority to appoint a
noncertified interpreter.
(d) The rights provided by this section may only be waived
expressly by the person charged if the waiver is affirmatively shown
to be intelligent and voluntary.