Page 216 - Ad Hoc Report June 2018
P. 216

 FINDINGS
 172 2 0 1 7
R E P O R T
O F
court uses them as well, so we run into massive scheduling problems.”802 Remote detention of defendants located long distances from their attor-
neys can also compound this problem. A panel attorney who also practices in the Dakotas testified that when clients are detained remotely, “[t]here are no interpret- ers there, so I have got to try and convince one of our interpreters, who is usually
a . . . person that is doing this on a very part-time basis, that they should take an entire day off, travel with me to this remote jail and interpret for maybe an hour.” 803 Additionally, panel attorneys have to balance their need for other experts or ser- vice providers for their cases, when considering whether to seek funding for an interpreter. The $800 limitation applicable to experts and other service providers, without judicial approval, is the “aggregate for the whole case,” so if an interpreter is hired, that could easily deplete the entire service provider allowance.804
The need for interpreters also intersects with the difficulties defense attorneys face when appointed to cases with Native American clients. Seeking to bridge this gap, the University of New Mexico has created a program to train in basic court procedures individuals who will function as interpreters for indigenous language speakers.805 A district judge testified that Arizona faces similar difficulties with indigenous language interpretation. She stated, “[W]e have so many dialects that come through . . . a trial that I have in December [requires] a Ch’ol interpreter, who only happens to speak Spanish herself, so it’s going to be a problem with English to Spanish to Ch’ol and then Ch’ol to Spanish to English.”806
Finally, witnesses explained that judges have been reluctant to pay for inter- preter services when a panel attorney has the prosecution’s translation.
An example would be the denial of a request for an interpreter to review taped phone calls when the government has already had their own interpreter trans- late them. A key function of the defense is the independent investigation of the evidence disclosed by the government. Should a key phrase in the transcription be wrong, the entire defense could be compromised. While common sense would seem to suggest it is duplicative work for the defense to conduct their own investigation, it actually is a dereliction of our duty to do any less.807
All of these issues affect a criminal defendant’s right to receive effective assis- tance of counsel under the CJA.
802 NeilFulton,FPD,D.S.D.&D.N.D.,PublicHearing—Minneapolis,Minn.,Panel2,Writ.Test.,at34. 803 AlexanderReichert,CJADist.Rep.,D.N.D.,PublicHearing—Minneapolis,Minn.,Panel5,Tr.,at11. 804 NatalieHarmon,CJAAdministrator,FPDO,W.D.Wash.,PublicHearing—Philadelphia,Pa.,Panel 4, Tr., at 28.
805 ChiefJudgeChristinaArmijo,D.N.M.,PublicHearing—SantaFe,N.M.,Panel1,Tr.,at6. 806 ChiefJudgeRanerCollins,D.Ariz.,PublicHearing—SantaFe,N.M.,Panel1,Tr.,at8.
807 KathyNester,FPD,D.Utah,PublicHearing—Portland,Or.,Panel6,AdditionalWrit.Test.,“Report to the Cardone Committee from the District of Utah” at 2–3.
No recommendation presented herein represents T H E A D H O C C O M M I T T E E T O R E V I E W T H E C R I M I N A L J U S T I C E A C T the policy of the Judicial Conference of the United States unless approved by the Conference itself.




















































































   214   215   216   217   218