90.606
Interpreters and translators.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
90.606 Interpreters and translators.—
(1)(a) When a judge determines that a witness cannot hear or understand the English language, or cannot express himself or herself in English sufficiently to be understood, an interpreter who is duly qualified to interpret for the witness shall be sworn to do so.
(b) This section is not limited to persons who speak a language other than English, but applies also to the language and descriptions of any person, such as a child or a person who is mentally or developmentally disabled, who cannot be reasonably understood, or who cannot understand questioning, without the aid of an interpreter.
(2) A person who serves in the role of interpreter or translator in any action or proceeding is subject to all the provisions of this chapter relating to witnesses.
(3) An interpreter shall take an oath that he or she will make a true interpretation of the questions asked and the answers given and that the interpreter will make a true translation into English of any writing which he or she is required by his or her duties to decipher or translate.
History.—s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; s. 22, ch. 78-361; s. 1, ch. 78-379; s. 2, ch. 85-53; s. 485, ch. 95-147.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2024 · leading case: Monte v. State
Monte v. State (1983)
“We emphasize, as we must, that the decision to appoint an interpreter in accordance with section 90.606, Florida Statutes (1981), is a matter largely within the trial court's discretion, Watson v.”
Gopar-Santana v. State (2003)
“2d DCA 1998); see also § 90.606(1)(a), (2), Fla. Stat. (2001) (requiring an interpreter to be "duly qualified" and sworn and providing that the interpreter will be subject to the rules of evidence relating to witnesses).”
Balderrama v. State (1983)
“§ 90.606(3), Fla. Stat. (1981). If a defendant does not understand the full significance of his change of plea because of a language difficulty, then his plea has not been freely and voluntarily made.”
Perez-Sovias v. State (2012)
“” Section 90.606 of the Florida Statutes acknowledges this mandate, requiring use of interpreters and translators where a witness cannot speak or understand English: When a judge determines that a witness cannot hear or understand the English language, or cannot express himself…”
Kaelin v. State (1982)
“See Section 90.606, Florida Statutes, Law Revision Council Note (1976).”
Ortega v. State (1998)
“Second, while Detective Formosa took the oath for a witness, he was not required to take the oath set forth for interpreters and translators under section 90.606, Florida Statutes (1995). In Hutchens v.”
Tehrani v. State (2000)
“Section 90.606, Florida Statutes (1997). In this case, the trial court recognized the defendant's difficulty with the language in the first trial.”
Rodriguez v. State (1995)
“Defendants first contend that the trial court erred in failing to have the interpreter sworn as required by Section 90.606, Florida Statutes (1993). We conclude that this claim is barred because this was not fundamental error and there was no contemporaneous objection.”
Apolinar v. FL. UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COM'N (1998)
“See § 90.606, Fla. Stat. (1995). Reversed and remanded.”
Marlon Joel Rivera v. State of Florida (2016)
“'Although there is a Florida statute that addresses the appointment of interpreters to translate for non-English speaking or otherwise language-impaired witnesses, see § 90.606, Fla. Stat. (2012), there is no Florida statute addressing the appointment of interpreters for…”
Mesidor v. State (1988)
“During the plea proceedings, the trial court failed to comply with § 90.606, Florida Statutes (1985), by failing to swear in the interpreter.”
Guardian Ad Litem Program v. O.R. (2010)
“As the Department says, [pjursuant to § 90.606, Fla. Stat. (2010), when the lower court makes the determination that a witness cannot understand English, the court orders an interpreter.”
— 90.606(1)(a) — 4 cases
Gopar-Santana v. State (2003)
“2d DCA 1998); see also § 90.606(1)(a), (2), Fla. Stat. (2001) (requiring an interpreter to be "duly qualified" and sworn and providing that the interpreter will be subject to the rules of evidence relating to witnesses).”
Perez-Sovias v. State (2012)
“” Section 90.606 of the Florida Statutes acknowledges this mandate, requiring use of interpreters and translators where a witness cannot speak or understand English: When a judge determines that a witness cannot hear or understand the English language, or cannot express himself…”
Obando v. State (2008)
— 90.606(2) — 1 case
Perez-Sovias v. State (2012)
“” Section 90.606 of the Florida Statutes acknowledges this mandate, requiring use of interpreters and translators where a witness cannot speak or understand English: When a judge determines that a witness cannot hear or understand the English language, or cannot express himself…”
— 90.606(3) — 7 cases
Monte v. State (1983)
“We emphasize, as we must, that the decision to appoint an interpreter in accordance with section 90.606, Florida Statutes (1981), is a matter largely within the trial court's discretion, Watson v.”
Balderrama v. State (1983)
“§ 90.606(3), Fla. Stat. (1981). If a defendant does not understand the full significance of his change of plea because of a language difficulty, then his plea has not been freely and voluntarily made.”
Gopar-Santana v. State (2003)
“2d DCA 1998); see also § 90.606(1)(a), (2), Fla. Stat. (2001) (requiring an interpreter to be "duly qualified" and sworn and providing that the interpreter will be subject to the rules of evidence relating to witnesses).”
BCS, SRL v. Wise (2005)
Echemendia v. State (1999)
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.