Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Mohamud Abukar

Summary

The Kentucky Supreme Court held that the trial court acted within its discretion in finding that Abukar could communicate adequately in English and therefore was not statutorily entitled to a Somali interpreter. The court construed the interpreter statute to require appointment when deficient English skills substantially prejudice a participant's rights or prevent understanding and rational participation, and it upheld the trial court's factual findings under the substantial-evidence standard. The court reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for consideration of Abukar's unresolved Batson claim.