Correa

Correa v. Superior Court

Good Law
101 Cal. Rptr. 2d 242·84 Cal. App. 4th 631
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 24, 2001G027265California3,228 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'LEARY, J.

Azucena Correa's writ petition addresses the admissibility of a police officer's testimony at a preliminary hearing with respect to statements made by the victim and witnesses in the field through an interpreter. We conclude the interpreter adds a layer of hearsay for which there is no legal exception. Accordingly, we hold the testimony was inadmissible, there was insufficient evidence to hold petitioner to answer, and thus her Penal Code section 995 motion should have been granted. [1]

In this case two English-only-speaking police officers responded to a domestic violence call and were confronted with a Spanish-only-speaking victim, Miguel Gil, and Spanish-only-speaking witnesses, Patricia Gil and petitioner's mother. At the scene, the officers utilized the translation services of two neighbors, Hector Garcia and Higinia Garcia. The record reflects Patricia called the police from the Garcias' residence but does not indicate what language was spoken on the phone. Hector assisted the police as an interpreter in their discussions with petitioner's mother and the victim. Higinia served as an interpreter in the discussions with petitioner's mother and Patricia.

At the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.