 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Flanagan v. Municipality of Anchorage9/27/2000 R>
On appeal, Flanagan asserts that the Anchorage police routinely and repeatedly violate the rights of deaf arrestees, and that we should therefore re-evaluate our decision in Nathan that a violation of the ADA does not, per se, require suppression of evidence. But the record does not support Flanagan's assertion. As explained above, the officers who arrested Flanagan made several attempts to locate an on-call ASL interpreter. Although they could not find one, they summoned an officer who could finger-spell in ASL to assist Flanagan. Moreover, the Anchorage Police Department has adopted a policy that requires officers to try to locate an interpreter when a deaf person is arrested.
Flanagan argues that the officers' efforts in his case were insufficient. He further argues that the police department's policy fails to satisfy various aspects of the ADA. But whether the police department's policy completely satisfies the ADA or not, it is apparent that the police department recognizes and is attempting to accommodate the needs of deaf arrestees.
We therefore re-affirm our decision in Nathan. If a defendant, because of deafness or any other language difficulty, fails to have a basic understanding of the right to an independent blood test, then the defendant's ensuing "waiver" of this right will be invalid and the defendant is entitled to suppression of their breath test results. But if, despite a language difficulty, the defendant has a basic understanding of the right to an independent test and knowingly waives this right, then the defendant is not entitled to suppression of the breath test results even though the police may have violated the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Page 1 2 Alaska Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|