Interpreters

Checkout our iOS App for a better way to browser and research.

Except as provided in Code Sections 24-6-656 and 24-6-657 or by the rules promulgated by the Supreme Court of Georgia pursuant to Code Section 15-1-14, an interpreter shall be subject to the provisions of Code Section 24-7-702. Interpreters shall be required to take an oath or affirmation to make a true translation.

(Code 1981, §24-6-604, enacted by Ga. L. 2011, p. 99, § 2/HB 24.)

Cross references.

- Interpreter, Fed. R. Evid. 604.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, § 38-1609 and former O.C.G.A. § 24-9-4 are included in the annotations for this Code section.

Purpose.

- If a procedure such as provided for by the former statute were not permissible, the witness unable to communicate in English or otherwise disabled would never be able to give the witness's testimony. Hensley v. State, 228 Ga. 501, 186 S.E.2d 729 (1972) (decided under former Code 1933, § 38-1609).

Questions for court and jury.

- Use of an interpreter, and the extent to which the examination will be allowed to proceed through the interpreter must necessarily lie within the sound discretion of the trial judge. Whether the evidence elicited be credible is a question for the jury who were there and who observed the witness, the witness's behavior on the stand and response to the questions and the manner of communication between the witness and the interpreter. Hensley v. State, 228 Ga. 501, 186 S.E.2d 729 (1972) (decided under former Code 1933, § 38-1609).

Discretion of trial judge.

- Use of an interpreter, and the extent to which the interpreter may be used in the examination of a witness, must necessarily lie within the sound discretion of the trial judge. Reed v. State, 249 Ga. 52, 287 S.E.2d 205 (1982) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-9-4).

Court officer as interpreter.

- When the witness in a criminal case was unable from the witness's physical condition to speak audibly, the witness's answers may be communicated in the witness's hearing and presence by a sworn officer of the court. Conner v. State, 25 Ga. 515, 71 Am. Dec. 184 (1858) (decided under former law).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 81 Am. Jur. 2d, Witnesses, § 180.

C.J.S.

- 98 C.J.S. (Rev), Witnesses, § 124.

ALR.

- Use of interpreter in court proceedings, 172 A.L.R. 923.

Deaf-mute as witness, 50 A.L.R.4th 1188.

Ineffective assistance of counsel: use or nonuse of interpreter at prosecution of foreign language speaking defendant, 79 A.L.R.4th 1102.

Admissibility of testimony concerning extrajudicial statements made to, or in presence of, witness through interpreter - state cases, 97 A.L.R.6th 567.

Admissibility of testimony concerning extrajudicial statements made to, or in presence of, witness through an interpreter - federal cases, 91 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 187.


Download our app to see the most-to-date content.