Section 885.37. Interpreters in municipal courts and administrative agency contested cases.

 

(1)  

(b) If a municipal court has notice that a person who is a juvenile or parent subject to ch. 938 , or who is a witness in a proceeding under ch. 938 , has a language difficulty because of the inability to speak or understand English, has a hearing impairment, is unable to speak or has a speech defect, the court shall make a factual determination of whether the language difficulty or the hearing or speaking impairment is sufficient to prevent the individual from communicating with his or her attorney, reasonably understanding the English testimony or reasonably being understood in English. If the court determines that an interpreter is necessary, the court shall advise the person that he or she has a right to a qualified interpreter and that, if the person cannot afford one, an interpreter will be provided for him or her at the public's expense. Any waiver of the right to an interpreter is effective only if made voluntarily in person, in open court and on the record.

(2)  A municipal court may authorize the use of an interpreter in actions or proceedings in addition to those specified in sub. (1) (b) .

(3)  

(a) In this subsection:

1. “Agency" includes any official, employee or person acting on behalf of an agency.

2. “Contested case" means a proceeding before an agency in which, after a hearing required by law, substantial interests of any party to the proceeding are determined or adversely affected by a decision or order in the proceeding and in which the assertion by one party of any such substantial interest is denied or controverted by another party to the proceeding.

(b) In any administrative contested case proceeding before a state, county or municipal agency, if the agency conducting the proceeding has notice that a party to the proceeding has a language difficulty because of the inability to speak or understand English, has a hearing impairment, is unable to speak or has a speech defect, the agency shall make a factual determination of whether the language difficulty or hearing or speaking impairment is sufficient to prevent the party from communicating with others, reasonably understanding the English testimony or reasonably being understood in English. If the agency determines that an interpreter is necessary, the agency shall advise the party that he or she has a right to a qualified interpreter. After considering the party's ability to pay and the other needs of the party, the agency may provide for an interpreter for the party at the public's expense. Any waiver of the right to an interpreter is effective only if made at the administrative contested case proceeding.

(3m)  Any agency may authorize the use of an interpreter in a contested case proceeding for a person who is not a party but who has a substantial interest in the proceeding.

(4)  

(a) The necessary expense of furnishing an interpreter for an indigent person in a municipal court shall be paid by the municipality.

(b) The necessary expense of furnishing an interpreter for an indigent party under sub. (3) shall be paid by the unit of government for which the proceeding is held.

(c) The court or agency shall determine indigency under this section.

(5)  

(a) If a municipal court under sub. (1) (b) or (2) or an agency under sub. (3) decides to appoint an interpreter, the court or agency shall follow the applicable procedure under par. (b) or (c) .

(b) The department of health services shall maintain a list of qualified interpreters for use with persons who have hearing impairments. The department shall distribute the list, upon request and without cost, to courts and agencies who must appoint interpreters. If an interpreter needs to be appointed for a person who has a hearing impairment, the court or agency shall appoint a qualified interpreter from the list. If no listed interpreter is available or able to interpret, the court or agency shall appoint as interpreter another person who is able to accurately communicate with and convey information to and receive information from the hearing-impaired person.

(c) If an interpreter needs to be appointed for a person with an impairment or difficulty not covered under par. (b) , the court or agency may appoint any person the court or agency decides is qualified.

Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d 585, 760 (1975); 1975 c. 106 , 199 ; Stats. 1975 s. 885.37; 1985 a. 266 ; 1987 a. 27 ; 1995 a. 27 ss. 7207 to 7209 , 9126 (19) ; 1995 a. 77 ; 2001 a. 16 ; 2007 a. 20 s. 9121 (6) (a) . A court has notice of a language difficulty when it becomes aware that a defendant's difficulty with English may impair his or her ability to communicate with counsel, to understand testimony, or to be understood in English and does not hinge on a request from counsel for an interpreter. State v. Yang, 201 Wis. 2d 725 , 549 N.W.2d 769 (Ct. App. 1996), 95-0583 . The hearing on the accommodation should precede the substantive hearing. Strook v. Kedinger, 2009 WI App 31 , 316 Wis. 2d 548 , 766 N.W.2d 219 , 07-2898 .