## Facts

- Martin Perez-Lastor, a Guatemalan Quiche Indian whose native language is Quiche, entered the United States without inspection in 1993 and later applied for asylum and withholding of deportation.
- He alleged persecution in Guatemala by guerrillas and government forces, including harassment and threats against his family and the killing of his father.
- At his 1997 deportation/asylum hearing, he requested Quiche-English interpretation because he communicated best in Quiche.
- A Quiche interpreter was provided, but Perez-Lastor repeatedly stated he did not understand the interpreter, and parts of his testimony were marked by unresponsive answers and apparent miscommunication.
- The immigration judge (IJ) declined to admit an English-language declaration Perez-Lastor had signed after determining he could not read or understand English.
- The IJ denied asylum and withholding largely on an adverse credibility finding, citing lack of consistency and specificity in Perez-Lastor’s testimony.
- The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed, including its conclusion that the translation quality did not violate due process.

## Issues

1. Whether incompetent interpretation at a deportation hearing can violate due process by denying a non-English-speaking respondent a full and fair hearing.
2. Whether Perez-Lastor showed prejudice from the alleged interpretation failures, particularly where the agency relied on credibility-based inconsistencies and vagueness.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit granted the petition for review in part, reversed the BIA’s order, and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court held Perez-Lastor was denied a fair hearing because the interpretation was incompetent, violating due process.
- The court found prejudice because the interpretation problems likely affected the credibility determination and could have changed the outcome.
- The court did not hold that the existing record compelled a grant of asylum or withholding; the remedy was a new hearing with competent interpretation.

## Legal Principles

- Due process in deportation proceedings requires a “full and fair hearing,” which includes competent interpretation for respondents who cannot meaningfully understand or communicate in English.
- Indicators supporting a finding of incompetent interpretation include repeated statements of misunderstanding, unresponsive answers suggesting the question was not conveyed, and identifiable instances of mistranslation.
- A due process claim in immigration proceedings requires prejudice; prejudice is shown when the defect may have affected the outcome, including by distorting testimony used to support an adverse credibility finding.
- When incompetent interpretation undermines the reliability of the hearing record and credibility analysis, the proper remedy is reversal and remand for a new hearing rather than an automatic grant of relief.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit set aside the agency’s denial of relief because incompetent interpretation deprived Perez-Lastor of a full and fair hearing and likely tainted the credibility findings, requiring a remand for a new, procedurally fair hearing with competent translation.


Perez-Lastor v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 208 F.3d 773 (9th Cir. 2000)