Cause Remanded to Determine If Somalian-born Defendant Should Have Had Interpreter at Grand Jury Proceeding

United States v. Hasan, ___ F.3d ___, No. 06-5234 (10th Cir. May 20, 2008)

Remand to the district court to enter findings on whether, under the Court Interpreter’s Act (CIA) (which applies equally to trials and to grand jury proceedings), the Somalian-born defendant was entitled to an interpreter at the grand jury proceedings. The questions under the CIA are: was his primary language other than English, and was his ability to comprehend and communicate during the proceedings inhibited without an interpreter. The district court determined that Defendant needed an interpreter for his trial on perjury charges arising out of his GJ testimony, but that determination was inconsistent with the fact that he had no interpreter at the grand jury.

Compelling case, compelling appendix of Defendant’s confused grand jury testimony, a travesty that he was prosecuted, and a travesty that Defendant was convicted. The inclusion of the appendix–unnecessary really–may be a signal by the 10th to the district court that it should find that the Defendant did not understand English well enough during the grand jury proceedings to have endured them without an interpreter, thus requiring dismissal of the perjury indictment.