The People v. Kenneth Slade , The People v. Kieth Brooks, The People v. Charo N. Allen


State of New York OPINION Court of Appeals This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. No. 27 The People &c., Respondent, v. Kenneth Slade, Appellant. ------------------------------ No. 28 The People &c., Appellant, v. Kieth Brooks, &c., Respondent. ------------------------------ No. 29 The People &c., Appellant, v. Charo N. Allen, Respondent. Case No. 27: John L. Palmer, for appellant. Paul A. Andersen, for respondent. Case No. 28: Paul A. Andersen, for appellant. Elizabeth Isaacs, for respondent. Case No. 29: Lauren Tan, for appellant. Felice Milani, for respondent. GARCIA, J.: In these three appeals, defendants challenge the facial sufficiency of the accusatory instrument filed against them, arguing that participation of a translator in the process of documenting the information from first-party witnesses with limited-English proficiency -1- -2- Nos. 27-29 created a hearsay defect requiring dismissal of the instrument. In the first two cases, applying our well-settled precedent, we hold that no facial defect was evident within the four corners of the accusatory instrument. Moreover, even in the third case where the participation of a translator was documented within the witness’s supporting affidavit, we conclude that no additional layer of hearsay was created by the use of a translator and therefore that accusatory instrument too was facially sufficient. Defendants have a right to be prosecuted by an information that meets all statutory requirements, as was the case here, but we decline to impose additional barriers to participation in the process for victims with limited-English proficiency. I. a. Kenneth Slade Slade assaulted his wife (the victim) at the home they shared and was charged in a misdemeanor complaint with assault in the third degree, a class A misdemeanor, and harassment in the second degree, a violation. The victim, as the deponent, asserted the following in the complaint: “at the above time and place, while she was seated in a chair [Slade] grabbed her by both her arms and lifted her off of the chair then threw her back onto the chair. . . . [A]s a result of [Slade’s] aforementioned actions she experienced bruising, swelling, and substantial pain to both arms and lower back and experienced annoyance, alarm, and fear for her physical safety.” The victim verified the complaint by signing it beneath the form notice stating that false statements made therein were punishable as a class A misdemeanor (see CPL 100.30 [1] -2- -3- Nos. 27-29 [d]). In a certificate of translation, prepared on the same day as the complaint, a translator stated that she translated the English-language complaint to the victim, including the form notice, in Spanish and that the victim confirmed to the translator that she understood what was translated. At Slade’s arraignment, the People announced that they were ready for trial, relying on the first-party complaint. However, the People did not file or serve the certificate of translation at that time, only doing so more than two years later upon Slade’s request for the document. Slade thereafter moved to dismiss the accusatory instrument …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals