Which statement best describes the use of telephonic interpreters in criminal proceedings?

• A. They may not be sworn
• B. They may be sworn if in-person interpreters are unavailable or inadequate
• C. They may be used only in civil matters
• D. They require Spanish language only

Answer: (B)

In criminal proceedings, interpreters must accurately convey everything said and help the participant understand the process. Telephonic interpreters are allowed when an in-person interpreter isn’t available or is inadequate to ensure clear and accurate communication. In such cases, the telephonic interpreter can be sworn, just like an in-person court interpreter, to affirm that their interpretation is truthful and accurate. This oath helps protect the defendant’s rights by maintaining the integrity of what is said and understood during the proceedings.

Telephonic interpretation is not limited to Spanish; it covers any language for which a qualified interpreter is needed, and it can be used in criminal cases as well as civil ones. The other statements aren’t correct because interpreters in court can be sworn, telephonic interpreters aren’t restricted to civil matters, and they aren’t limited to Spanish.