People v. Superior Court
Opinion
Opinion
Vartabedian, J.
California Constitution, article I, section 14, provides in part, “A person unable to understand English who is charged with a crime has a right to an interpreter throughout the proceedings.” We are called upon to determine if the failure to follow the procedures regarding noncertified interpreters set forth in California Rules of Court, rule 984.2, in and of itself, violates this constitutional right, justifying the granting of a motion to strike the prior convictions in question.
Background
Real party in interest, Jose Almaraz (hereafter Almaraz), was charged with driving under the influence (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)) and driving while having a blood-alcohol level of .08 or higher (§ 23152, subd. (b)). Alleged as to each of these offenses were three prior convictions of driving under the influence within the requisite time period, elevating the charged offenses to felonies. (§ 23550.) In addition, Almaraz was charged with driving when the privilege had been suspended for a prior conviction of driving under the influence. (§ 14601.2, subd. (a).) Five prior convictions were alleged for this count.