LITTLE ROCK — A Washington County man is entitled to a new trial because of questions about the accuracy of an English translation of a statement he gave to police in Spanish, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
The court overturned the conviction of Jose Luis Mendez, who was sentenced to 60 years in prison for rape, attempted murder, aggravated residential burglary and aggravated assault.
Mendez was arrested and charged after his former girlfriend told police he broke into her home, raped and badly injured her. A detective interviewed Mendez, and the interview was recorded.
An employee of the prosecutor’s office prepared a translation of the interview, and that translation was admitted as evidence at Mendez’s trial in Washington County Circuit Court. The defense offered into evidence a different translation, which differed from the state’s translation in some respects.
During the interview, Mendez admitted that he grabbed his girlfriend’s neck. The detective asked him if he tried to kill her, and Mendez asked why he would kill her. The detective said, “Grabbing her by the neck?”
Independent reporting for Pine Bluff & Jefferson County since 1879.
According to the prosecution’s translator, Mendez then said, “I did that.” According to the defense’s translator, Mendez said, “I didn’t do that.”
The defense’s translator testified that he is a certified translator for the state of Arkansas. The translator with the prosecutor’s office had taken the translator’s qualification exam but failed.
The trial judge admitted both translations, concluding that the question of which version was more credible was a matter for the jury. The Supreme Court said in its unanimous opinion Thursday that the judge erred.
“Only where two qualified translations are offered does the court determine whether there is a genuine issue as to the accuracy of a material part of the translation to be resolved by the trier of fact,” Justice Karen Baker wrote in the opinion.
“Here, not only was the state’s translator uncertified, he had taken and failed the certification exam. Accordingly, the state’s translation should not have been admitted,” Baker wrote.
The high court sent the case back to circuit court for a new proceeding.