I have thought of a new idea for the website. I have amassed quite a number of reported cases that deal with interpreting in one way or another, so I have decided to share them and my thoughts about them with you. I will use the briefing method sometimes just describing the case, and at other times adding my commentary. It will be an occasional series depending on my work load.
The first one is a case I ran across that deals with parents who disagreed with an IEP and appealed in a due process hearing. I was attracted to it because the parties hired expert witnesses to help present their cases, and I am always interested in interpreters as experts. I hope you find it interesting. Let me know your thoughts.
Petersen By and Through Peterson v. Hastings Public Schools,
831 F.Supp. 742 (D. Neb. 1993)
Russ v. State, 709 N.W.2d 483 (Wisc. 2005), reports a deaf man's challenge to being handcuffed during a court proceeding. Though his challenge ultimately failed, the opinion is clear that the challenge is viable when the defendant demonstrates sufficient facts proving the cuffs interferred with the inability to communicate during a proceedings
Moore v. State, 2007 WL 914637 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/28/07), presents an interesting function based statute from Louisiana that clearly provides for the proceedings and witness functions of court interpreters, but does not mention (at least in this opinion) the access to counsel function. In Moore, a hard of hearing man was denied an interpreter, and the court found that he did not qualify for one under the statute as applied.