Opinion ID: 1435822
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Juror # 6 English Comprehension Voir Dire Inconclusive

Text: The first issues raised by Diaz are related to the seating of a bilingual juror to hear and decide his case. When the venire was assembled for the jury selection process, the panel was collectively asked several voir dire questions. The prospective jurors were then requested to come to the side-bar individually if they had given an affirmative answer to any of the voir dire questions, or if they had any other concerns to express. The record reflects that the following exchange occurred at the side-bar conference with a prospective juror. Prospective Juror: ... English is my second language and sometimes I have difficulty understanding everything in English, so I don't want to make the wrong decision because of my English. Judge: Okay. It sounds as though you are pretty good in English. The thing is, we expect to have an interpreter and if you are a juror, I can ask her to interpret in Spanish louder than she might ordinarily. Prospective Juror: That would be good. Judge: You will hear the witness. Some of the witnesses will testify in Spanish. Prospective Juror: Okay. Judge: Is that okay? Prospective Juror: That's fine.... Judge: ... You're okay with that? You feel comfortable with that? Prospective Juror: Yeah. Judge: Okay. Prosecutrix: Your Honor, can I clarify: Are you going to have [the official interpreter] translate for the jurors? Is that what you're suggesting? The English  Judge: Actually, questions will be asked in English. Okay? Some witnesses might respond in Spanish and have that translated into English. Do you follow me? Prospective Juror: Yeah. Judge: So that would be no problem for you, then, would it? Prospective Juror: I understand a lot. Just with new words I would have a problem with that and, you know, I don't know the meaning of  you know, make decisions  a decision that I would be wrong because I didn't understand a word. Judge: Well, if you were a juror and you let me know what words you don't understand  Prospective Juror: Mm-hmmm. Judge:  would that be helpful? Prospective Juror: Okay. And it would be  Judge: Because if there's something  if there's a word you don't understand and you were a juror, just raise your hand and we will take care of that. Prospective Juror: Okay. Judge: Is that okay? Prospective Juror: That's fine. Judge: Okay. The prospective juror returned to her seat. There were no objections to the trial judge's limited voir dire or suggested course of action for addressing the prospective juror's concerns about her English language ability. Neither of the attorneys asked for the prospective juror to be excused for cause or later used a peremptory challenge to remove her. This prospective juror was ultimately seated as Juror # 6 for Diaz's trial. The Delaware juror qualification statute provides, in part, that all persons are qualified for jury service except those who: ... are unable to read, speak, and understand the English language. [6] In accordance with the statute, the trial judge must decide whether a prospective juror has the ability to read, speak, and understand the English language. Various cases and treatises have emphasized the important role of voir dire examination in determining the English literacy of prospective jurors. One of the first cases to examine the federal requirement that jurors possess basic English proficiency stated: There is no real risk of litigants being tried by juries unable to understand the evidence since if any veniremen lack sufficient facility with English to render competent jury service, they can be and are eliminated on voir dire.... [7] The conduct of such voir dire was examined in a subsequent case in U.S. v. Cortes. [8] The defendant moved for a new trial on the basis that one of the jurors should have been disqualified because of her inability to understand English. The court held that the procedure whereby prospective jurors are required to read, write and understand the English language with a degree of proficiency to satisfactorily complete the juror qualification form, combined with submission to two separate voir dire proceedings in English, provided the defendant with a jury sufficiently proficient in English. [9] In Delaware, the trial judge must use his or her discretion in determining whether each prospective bilingual juror has a sufficient command of English to meet the statutory requirements. This discretion should be exercised after obtaining substantive information through expanded individual voir dire questions that elicit more than yes and no responses. [10] Prospective jurors must be excused if they cannot demonstrate a sufficient knowledge of English. [11] If the trial judge is not satisfied that a prospective juror's English proficiency comports with the requirements of the statute, that person should be dismissed, not only from the jury venire for the case, but also from the master jury pool. Instead of conducting expanded voir dire to determine whether Juror # 6's understanding of English satisfied the statutory requirements, the trial judge simply stated it sounds as though you are pretty good in English. The judge then advised Juror # 6 that an official interpreter would be used during part of the trial proceedings and would be available if Juror # 6 wanted clarification in Spanish of any English testimony she did not understand. After the entire jury was empaneled for Diaz's trial, but before the proceedings began, the judge offered additional assistance to Juror # 6 in open court, as follows: I would mention at this time that I certainly don't  don't want to embarrass you, [Juror # 6], but you indicated previously that your primary language is Spanish and your secondary language is English. Please, if there's a word you don't understand, I do invite you to raise your hand and that will be a signal for the attorneys or the Court to restate what was just said, maybe using another word that you would understand. Once again, the attorneys for the parties raised no objection or requested any other action by the trial judge. The voir dire record in this case does not reflect any basis for or ruling by the trial judge that Juror # 6 was proficient in reading, speaking, or understanding the English language. [12]