U.S. v. Garcia

In prosecution on drug-distribution conspiracy charges, Dist. Ct. did not deny Spanish-speaking defendant due process by recalling main govt. witness for second day of testimony due to allegation that Spanish interpreter provided inaccurate translations of said witness’s testimony during first day of witness’s testimony. Defendant could only point to three examples of inaccurate translations, witness generally repeated his answers to generally same questions on second day of testimony, and defendant did not claim that translations from second day of testimony were inaccurate. Moreover, alleged mistranslations were clarified by answers to similar questions during first day of testimony or by testimony elicited during second day of testimony. Fact that witness was recalled on second day did not improperly give govt. improper second chance to establish its case, and fact that first day’s interpreter was not federally certified did not require different result, where defendant had agreed to use of said interpreter. Dist. Ct. erred, though, in sentencing different defendant to enhanced sentence under 21 USC section 841(b)(1)(A)(viii) based on prior Indiana conviction for manufacture of certain drugs, since Indiana conviction did not qualify as “felony drug offense” required for said enhancement.