New York State Assembly

 
•  Summary 
 
•  Actions 
 
•  Committee Votes 
 
•  Floor Votes 
 
•  Memo 
 
•  Text 
 
•  LFIN 
 
•  Chamber Video/Transcript 

A01422 Summary:

A01422 Actions:

A01422 Committee Votes:

Committee:CODES   Chair:Dinowitz      
DATE:06/09/2025AYE/NAY:15/5  Action: Favorable refer to committee Rules        
Dinowitz
Aye
Morinello
Nay
Cook
Aye
Reilly
Excused
Lavine
Aye
Mikulin
Nay
Weprin
Aye
Tannousis
Nay
Hevesi
Aye
Angelino
Nay
Seawright
Aye
Molitor
Nay
Rosenthal
Aye
Walker
Aye
Vanel
Absent
Cruz
Aye
Epstein
Aye
Bores
Aye
Reyes
Aye
Cunningham
Aye
Romero
Aye
Alvarez
Aye

Committee:RULES   Chair:Glick      
DATE:06/10/2025AYE/NAY:19/9  Action: Favorable         
Heastie
Excused
Barclay
Nay
Pretlow
Aye
Hawley
Nay
Cook
Aye
Blankenbush
Nay
Glick
Aye
Ra
Nay
Dinowitz
Aye
Brabenec
Nay
Colton
Aye
Palmesano
Nay
Magnarelli
Excused
Reilly
Nay
Paulin
Aye
Smith
Nay
Peoples-Stokes
Aye
Jensen
Nay
Benedetto
Excused
Lavine
Aye
Lupardo
Aye
Braunstein
Aye
Davila
Aye
Hyndman
Aye
Rozic
Aye
Bronson
Aye
Hevesi
Aye
Hunter
Aye
Taylor
Aye
Cruz
Aye
Vanel
Aye

A01422 Floor Votes:

A01422 Memo:

NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION
 submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)



 
BILL NUMBER: A1422
 
SPONSOR: Cruz

 
TITLE OF BILL:
 
An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to requiring
accurate interpretation of statements made by deponents with limited
English proficiency in accusatory instruments and supporting depositions
 
 
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:
 
The purpose of this legislation is to ensure that deponents who are not
fully proficient in the English language have their statements in
support of an accusatory instrument accurately taken.
 
 
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:

Section one of the bill amends section 100.40 of the criminal procedure
law by adding a new subdivision that sets forth two alternate procedures
for taking statements from deponents with limited English proficiency.
 
Section two sets forth the effective date.
 
 
JUSTIFICATION:
 
New York is a linguistically diverse state, and some New Yorkers are not
fully proficient in the English language. In the criminal-justice
context, this becomes an issue when a New Yorker who is not fully profi-
cient in English seeks to report a crime.
 
In a recent trio of criminal appeals involving the use of translators
for documenting statements from such witnesses, the New York State Court
of Appeals decided that it would be inappropriate to require that a
certificate of translation be filed with a supporting deposition when
converting a complaint to an information. The court's decision in these
cases fails to account for the fact that, for many New Yorkers, English
is not their primary language. This bill seeks to remedy that failure.
 
In New York, absent a waiver from the accused, the People may proceed
with a prosecution only when a complaint has been duly converted to an
information. This is because, unlike a complaint, which may contain
hearsay allegations, an information must contain non-hearsay factual
allegations of an evidentiary character that, if true, would establish
every element of the offense charged and the defendant's commission of
that offense. These factual allegations are usually relayed to law
enforcement officials either verbally or in writing.  Either way, these
statements ultimately take the form of a supporting deposition that is
then appended to the complaint, thus completing the necessary conver-
sion. The person making these statements, whether they be a witness to
the offense or the alleged complainant/victim, is known as a deponent.
 
A description of this process lays bare the problem - How can a person
who is not proficient in English relay facts of an evidentiary character
to law enforcement officials if he, she, or they cannot speak or write
English? The solution is rather simple: Require that law enforcement
officials use qualified translators who can translate the deponent's
accusations into English, and then require that these individuals submit
affidavits affirming what they did as well as their qualifications.
 
Perplexingly, the majority in this case characterizes any requirement
that a certificate of translation be filed when converting a complaint
to an information as a "judicially-created" barrier to justice. However,
the police already rely on translation services if such services are
readily available to them. The issue is that they sometimes rely on
people who do not subsequently disclose the extent to which they are in
fact qualified to serve as translators or interpreters. Performing
translations and interpreting comments from one language to another is
inherently complex, and any error when taking down a person's statement
while preparing a supporting deposition may result in the mischaraoteri-
zation of an allegation of fact necessary to support the conversion of
a. complaint into an information. Moreover, the dissent in that case
correctly notes that having a translator allows for more access to the
criminal justice system, not less.
 
The proposed legislation would ehsure that deponents have their allega-
tions accurately translated by someone who is qualified to translate
them, while also putting defendants on sufficient notice of the facts
giving rise to the factual allegations levied against them.
 
 
PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
 
New Bill.
 
 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
 
To be determined.
 
 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect on the ninetieth day after it shall have
become a law.

A01422 Text:

 
                STATE OF NEW YORK
        ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                          1422
 
                               2025-2026 Regular Sessions
 
                   IN ASSEMBLY
 
                                     January 9, 2025
                                       ___________
 
        Introduced by M. of A. CRUZ, DE LOS SANTOS, SIMONE, KELLES, SIMON, RAGA,
          TAYLOR,  SEAWRIGHT,  LEVENBERG,  OTIS, WALKER, DAVILA, GLICK, ZACCARO,
          ZINERMAN, ROSENTHAL, K. BROWN -- read once and referred to the Commit-
          tee on Codes
 
        AN ACT to amend the criminal procedure law,  in  relation  to  requiring
          accurate  interpretation  of statements made by deponents with limited
          English proficiency in accusatory instruments and  supporting  deposi-
          tions
 
          The  People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assem-
        bly, do enact as follows:
 
     1    Section 1. Section 100.40 of the criminal procedure law is amended  by
     2  adding a new subdivision 5 to read as follows:
     3    5.  Notwithstanding  any  provision  of law to the contrary, where the
     4  factual allegations of an accusatory instrument  and/or  any  supporting
     5  deposition  filed in connection with such instrument consist of a state-
     6  ment made by a deponent to  a  public  servant  or  other  person  in  a
     7  language  other  than  English,  such instrument shall not be sufficient
     8  unless it is accompanied by:
     9    (a) (i)  A  statement  of  the  factual  allegations  written  in  the
    10  deponent's  primary  language and a signed verification under penalty of
    11  perjury in the deponent's primary  language;  (ii)  an  English-language
    12  translation  of the deponent's statement and of the verification written
    13  by an interpreter; and (iii) an affidavit by the interpreter stating the
    14  interpreter's qualifications and affirming the accuracy of  such  trans-
    15  lation; or
    16    (b)  (i) A written English-language translation of the deponent's oral
    17  or written statement of the factual allegations, drafted  by  an  inter-
    18  preter;  and  (ii)  an  affidavit  from the interpreter: (A) stating the
    19  interpreter's qualifications; (B) affirming that the  interpreter  accu-
    20  rately  translated  such  statement into English; (C) affirming that the
    21  interpreter accurately communicated the content of the statement to  the
 
         EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                              [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                                   LBD03852-01-5
        A. 1422                             2
 
     1  deponent  in  the  deponent's  primary  language; (D) affirming that the
     2  deponent confirmed the accuracy of the allegations as communicated;  and
     3  (E)  affirming  that the interpreter accurately translated the verifica-
     4  tion statement to the witness in the witness's primary language.
     5    §  2.  This  act shall take effect on the ninetieth day after it shall
     6  have become a law.