A Kansas court has ruled that police can't use Google Translate as a form of communication when obtaining consent to search a person. In September 2017, Omar Cruz-Zamora was stopped by police when they used Google Translate to ask to search his car. Confused, he agreed to the search and was arrested.
The judge ruled that Google Translate isn't good enough for constitutional search purposes.
Police Using Google Translate For Consent
In September 2017, police used Google Translate to ask Cruz-Zamora for permission to search his car. Cruz-Zamora is a Mexican citizen living in the United States on a visa. He isn't required by law to let police search his car. When police searched his car, they found 14 pounds of cocaine and methamphetamines.
On June 4, a Kansas judge gave Cruz-Zamora a motion to suppress the evidence. In the ruling, the translation provided by Google Translate was called "literal but nonsensical." When police asked Cruz-Zamora if they could search his car, the translation provided was a literal translation but not one that showed the intent of the officer that wanted Cruz-Zamora's car.
When police typed "can I search the car?" into Google Translate, the translation was equivalent to "Can I find the car." This shows that even though Google Translate can provide a translation, it doesn't mean that the result will make sense in the other language.
During the exchange with police, Cruz-Zamora told officers that he didn't understand what they were trying to ask him nine times. The exchange between Cruz-Zamora and the police wasn't captured on video, and written transcript of the exchange doesn't prove that Cruz-Zamora knew what he was consenting to.
Similar Case In Texas
In a similar case in Texas, Google Translate was used by the police, and the court found that the exchange did lead to a voluntary search. In that case, the court found that the search was voluntary because the person knew what the officer was going to do. In this instance, the officer pointed to his eyes and then the trunk of the car. Once this happened, the person opened the trunk, which showed that they understand what was happening at the moment.
In the Cruz-Zamora case, the state tried to argue that his actions implied that there was consent during the search. The judge said that person standing by the side of the road doesn't imply consent on their part.
