The Attorney's Request to 'Just Explain' the Plea Offer
During a felony assault trial, you are the certified Spanish interpreter for the defendant, whose English is limited. At the morning recess, defense counsel-who speaks conversational Spanish-asks you to 'just explain' the state's plea offer to the client in plain words and to sign the plea waiver as a witness, saying it will save the court time and avoid a continuance. Earlier, after the defendant interrupted the proceedings in Spanish, the judge asked you to summarize for the record what the defendant 'was trying to say.' You also recognize the defendant's mother as a fellow member of your church. The hallway conversation would not be recorded, and the attorney says the client already 'gets the gist.' The judge has not ruled on the earlier request.
1. How should you respond to defense counsel's request to explain the plea and witness the waiver?
Read the worked answer
I would decline to explain the plea or give legal advice. The interpreter's role is to render communications accurately, not to advise the defendant or interpret legal options in place of counsel. I would offer to interpret a conversation between the attorney and client in consecutive mode, first person, without additions or omissions. If counsel wants to discuss the offer, counsel must do the explaining, ideally with an interpreter present. I would also decline to sign the plea waiver as a witness: that conflates the interpreter's role with that of a legal witness and may create an appearance that the interpreter advised the defendant. Unrecorded hallway communications are risky; I would ask that the plea discussion occur on the record or with a court reporter. I would document the request and my response.
2. What should you do about the judge's request to summarize the defendant's outburst?
Read the worked answer
I should not summarize or characterize the outburst. Summarizing is not interpreting and risks inserting my impression into the record. If the defendant spoke in Spanish and the words were captured, I can interpret the exact utterance. If the statement is not on the record and I do not have a reliable recording, I should say that I cannot reconstruct it from memory and suggest the court rely on the court reporter or an audio recording. I can offer to interpret contemporaneously if the defendant speaks again. I must remain neutral and avoid speculation about what the defendant 'was trying to say.' The judge may control the courtroom, but the interpreter's duty is accurate rendition, not editorial summary.
3. Does the church acquaintance require disclosure or recusal?
Read the worked answer
A mere social acquaintance is not automatically disqualifying, but it should be disclosed to the parties and the judge so they can assess whether it affects impartiality or confidentiality. If the mother has discussed the case with me outside court, I must disclose that and may need to recuse. I should not make the decision ex parte or conceal the relationship. The test is whether the acquaintance creates a reasonable appearance of partiality or a risk that confidential information has been shared. I would state the facts on the record and let the court and parties decide whether I should continue.