POLICE OFFICER INTERPRETER HEARSAY

Saavedra v. State, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 25 (January 3, 2008). In an unpublished opinion, an Appeals court in Texas granted a new trial based on interpreter hearsay. The appellant argued that it was error to allow a Detective totestify that appellant admitted to a Spanish interpreter he abused his step-daughter. The Detective admitted he could not understand Spanish and did not know what appellant said to the interpreter. The interpreter did not testify at trial. Appellant argues such testimony is hearsay, not subject to any exception, and resulted in harm because complainant denied the charge at trial, the State emphasized the hearsay during closing argument, and it relied almost exclusively on the testimony to get a conviction.

The Government urged the court to adopt the "language conduit rule," which allows an officer to testify to an interpreter's translation if it meets certain requirements. "We decline the State's invitation to revisit our holding in Durbin. Durbin, 775 S.W.2d at 800 ("A person conversing with a third person through an interpreter is not qualified to testify to the other person's statements, because he knows them only through the hearsay of the interpretor.").