(1) The court in any matter, criminal or civil, shall appoint a qualified interpreter or interpreters, to be paid out of the State Treasury, for the following categories of persons, whether they are parties, jurors, or witnesses:
(a) Persons who because of deafness or hard of hearing:
1. Use sign language, such as pidgin, signed English, American Sign Language, or gestures; or
2. Are oral/aural and use interpreters and assistive technology, as their primary mode of communication;
(b) Persons who cannot communicate in English; and
(c) Any other person who has, in the opinion of the court, another type of disability which will prevent him from properly understanding the nature of the proceedings or substantially prejudice his rights.
(2) Upon request of the person for whom the interpreter is appointed, or on the court's own motion, an interpreter may be removed for inability to communicate with the person, or if for reasonable cause another interpreter is so desired by the person for whom the interpreter is appointed, or because the services of an interpreter are not desired by the person. Effective: July 15, 1994 History: Amended 1994 Ky. Acts ch. 452, sec. 3, effective July 15, 1994. – Amended 1992 Ky. Acts ch. 144, sec. 7, effective July 14, 1992. -- Created 1976 (1st Extra. Sess.) Ky. Acts ch. 22, sec. 66, effective January 2, 1978.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 2004–2025 · leading case:
Commonwealth v. Abukar, 497 S.W.3d 231 (Ky. 2016).
Commonwealth v. Abukar, 497 S.W.3d 231 (Ky. 2016).
· cites it 7× “The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment upon its conclusion that the trial court’s failure to provide Abukar with a Somali interpreter for his rape trial violated KRS 30A.410. 1 The Commonwealth sought discretionary review of that decision, arguing that the trial court…”
Woodard v. Commonwealth, 147 S.W.3d 63 (Ky. 2004).
· cites it 2× “" [12] KRS 30A.410(1) takes this a step further and even outlines the requirements for appointing an interpreter for a deaf juror.”
Mosier v. Kentucky, 640 F. Supp. 2d 875 (E.D. Ky. 2009).
· cites it 4× “Ky.Rev.Stat. § 30A.410. Defendants argue that because the statute says “parties, jurors or witnesses” the courts are precluded from providing interpreters for attorneys.”
Abukar v. Commonwealth, 530 S.W.3d 915 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).
“He appealed to this Court presenting three arguments: (1) the failure of the trial court to provide him a Somali interpreter for his trial violated KRS 30A.410; (2) the trial court erroneously denied his motion to suppress evidence obtained when he was detained without probable…”
Odilon Paz-Salvador v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, No. 2018-SC-0171 (Ky. Apr. 18, 2019).
“See KRS 30A.410(l)(b). Further, Paz-Salvador does not argue that the translation provided by the court-appointed translator was improper or deficient in any way.”
Cleysler Ramirez-Gonzalez v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, No. 2024-CA-0128 (Ky. Ct. App. July 11, 2025).
“Here, the trial court did appoint the AOC interpreters in accordance with KRS 30A.410. KRS 30A.405(2) vests the Kentucky Supreme Court with the power to “prescribe standards .”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 30A.410(1): 2 cases
Woodard v. Commonwealth, 147 S.W.3d 63 (Ky. 2004).
“" [12] KRS 30A.410(1) takes this a step further and even outlines the requirements for appointing an interpreter for a deaf juror.”
Commonwealth v. Abukar, 497 S.W.3d 231 (Ky. 2016).
“The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment upon its conclusion that the trial court’s failure to provide Abukar with a Somali interpreter for his rape trial violated KRS 30A.410. 1 The Commonwealth sought discretionary review of that decision, arguing that the trial court…”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 30A.410(l)(b): 2 cases
Commonwealth v. Abukar, 497 S.W.3d 231 (Ky. 2016).
“The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment upon its conclusion that the trial court’s failure to provide Abukar with a Somali interpreter for his rape trial violated KRS 30A.410. 1 The Commonwealth sought discretionary review of that decision, arguing that the trial court…”
Odilon Paz-Salvador v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, No. 2018-SC-0171 (Ky. Apr. 18, 2019).
“See KRS 30A.410(l)(b). Further, Paz-Salvador does not argue that the translation provided by the court-appointed translator was improper or deficient in any way.”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 30A.410(l)(c): 1 case
Commonwealth v. Abukar, 497 S.W.3d 231 (Ky. 2016).
“The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment upon its conclusion that the trial court’s failure to provide Abukar with a Somali interpreter for his rape trial violated KRS 30A.410. 1 The Commonwealth sought discretionary review of that decision, arguing that the trial court…”
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.