This act [38-10-1 to 38-10-8 NMSA 1978] may be cited as the “Court Interpreters Act”.
History: Laws 1985, ch. 209, § 1.
ANNOTATIONS
Sharing or borrowing an interpreter does not constitute structural error and reversal is warranted only on a showing of prejudice. State v. Nguyen, 2008-NMCA-073, 144 N.M. 197, 185 P.3d 368, cert. denied, 2008-NMCERT-004, 144 N.M. 47, 183 P.3d 932.
Sharing of interpreters is a not a personal decision of the defendant. — The decision whether to use one interpreter to cover translations for the juror and for the defendant is not a personal right of the defendant, but falls within the realm of decisions by counsel that implicate constitutional rights, but that nevertheless can be waived by counsel, in the absence of any showing of prejudice. State v. Nguyen, 2008-NMCA-073, 144 N.M. 197, 185 P.3d 368, cert. denied, 2008-NMCERT-004, 144 N.M. 47, 183 P.3d 932.
Law reviews. — For article, “Attorney as interpreter: A return to babble,” 20 N.M.L. Rev. 1 (1990).
For article, “Lawyers, Linguists, Story-Tellers and Limited English Speaking Witnesses,” see 27 N.M.L. Rev. 77 (1997).
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Ineffective assistance of counsel: use or nonuse of interpreter at prosecution of foreign language speaking defendant, 79 A.L.R.4th 1102.