SC Court Reverses Dismissal Over Spanish Interpreter Shortage

Juan Manuel Ramirez Sandoval had been waiting for a retrial since early 2020, when his first trial ended in a hung jury. COVID-19 suspended jury trials in April 2020. When courts reopened, both sides tried to reschedule — but ran into a wall: South Carolina could not find two qualified Spanish-speaking interpreters, which court rules require for a case where the defendant and key witnesses speak only Spanish. By July 2022, only one of the two required interpreters was available. The trial never happened.

What the courts decided — and why it matters for immigrant defendants

In January 2023, the circuit court held a hearing on Sandoval's speedy trial motion. The judge told Sandoval through a single interpreter that his choices were to plead guilty and face deportation, or go to trial and risk 25 years in prison followed by deportation. Sandoval said he could not plead guilty to an offer he did not fully understand. By March 2023, the state confirmed it still had only one qualified interpreter. The circuit court dismissed all charges, finding Sandoval's right to a speedy trial and due process had been violated. Sandoval was released to ICE and deported to Mexico in May 2023.

The state appealed. In September 2026, the South Carolina Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal and sent the case back to the lower court. The appeals court applied the four-factor test from the U.S. Supreme Court's Barker v. Wingo decision — which weighs the length of delay, the reason for the delay, whether the defendant asserted his right, and prejudice to the defendant. The court found the circuit court made a legal error: it heavily weighed the interpreter shortage against the prosecution, even though there was no evidence of bad faith or intentional delay by the state. The appeals court ruled that a neutral, systemic problem — like a shortage of certified court interpreters — cannot automatically count against prosecutors in a speedy trial analysis.

This ruling has real consequences for Spanish-speaking and other non-English-speaking defendants across South Carolina. It signals that courts may not dismiss criminal charges simply because the system lacks qualified interpreters — even when that shortage causes years of delay. For immigrant defendants in removal proceedings (the immigration court process to decide whether someone is deported), a pending criminal case can directly affect their immigration status, bond hearings, and asylum claims. A case that drags on without resolution keeps that uncertainty alive.

What to do

• If you are a non-English speaker facing criminal charges, ask your defense attorney in writing whether a certified court interpreter has been confirmed for every hearing — not just one, but the full number required by your state's court rules.
• If your trial keeps getting postponed, ask your attorney to file a formal speedy trial motion. The clock on your speedy trial right generally starts from your arrest or indictment — document every delay and its stated reason.
• If you are also in immigration removal proceedings, tell your immigration lawyer about any pending criminal case immediately. A criminal dismissal, conviction, or even a prolonged delay can affect your bond hearing, your asylum application, and your deportation defense.
• If you believe your rights are being violated because the court cannot provide an interpreter, consult both a criminal defense attorney and an immigration lawyer — these two legal tracks affect each other directly.

A full breakdown of this topic — in our guide “Appealing to the BIA”.