Heavens!
From what I understand about the case, it seems to be not much difference between this case and that Florida child rapist’s case.
Do you know the case which I speak?
My goodness, what might be your point?
The Florida case, he seems to be quite fluent with English.

*Anne*

As an apparent aside - which is really all about the main point -
The man was in the system for 3 years.
The Constitution requires that he be given a speedy trial (it doesn't define what that means).
He IS innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt ( yet the media has already convicted him)
His attorneys had made speedy trial demands
The defendant is not obligated to obtain his own interpretor the state is.
The state fucked up for three years.
The trial court properly dismissed the matter.
The real bad guy here is the state which could have acted more reasonably.

Some other issues:
The man's seeming facility with English is irrelevant under the law because he could demonstrate that he was a native speaker of another tongue.

On appeal this will most probably be kicked back to trial court with instructions to get him a translator.