Summary
finding that where a complainant who spoke some English failed to signal in any way that the interpreter was not translating correctly and did not have evidence of error, the burden of proving the interpreter was failing to perform the job was not met
Summary of this case from Gutierrez v. CapraOpinion
Argued March 27, 2000.
May 8, 2000.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leach, J.), rendered July 30, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (three counts), robbery in the third degree, unauthorized use of a vehicle in the third degree, and theft of services, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
M. Sue Wycoff, New York, N.Y. for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J. Caferri, and Jess A. Velona of counsel), for respondent.
LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the integrity of the Grand Jury proceeding was impaired by the use of an interpreter who failed to accurately translate the complainant's testimony is without merit. The complainant, who understood some English, gave no indication during the Grand Jury proceeding that the interpreter was translating his testimony inaccurately, and the record is devoid of evidence that any error in translation occurred. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment (see, People v. Gil, 251 A.D.2d 121; People v. Rivera, 199 A.D.2d 288; People v. Perez, 198 A.D.2d 446, 447).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
BRACKEN, J.P., SULLIVAN, ALTMAN and KRAUSMAN, JJ., concur.