Did the proceedings against Gutierrez proceed in a language other than his primary language and inhibit his comprehension such that they were fundamentally unfair?

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW The Court Interpreter’s Act, as well as the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, require a district court to appoint a qualified interpreter for a defendant, (a) who comprehends best in a language other than English, and (b) is “inhibited” in his “comprehension of the proceedings or communication with counsel or the presiding officer,” (c) “to such an extent as to have made the hearing fundamentally unfair.” United States v. Hasan, 526 F.3d 653, 666 (10th Cir. 2008) (Gorsuch, J.) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1827(d)(1)(A)). Gutierrez, and three others, were arrested near backpacks containing more than 100 kilograms of marijuana. His primary language was Tepehuan, spoken by people indigenous to northern Mexico. The district court provided a English-Spanish interpreter. Gutierrez could not comprehend the proceedings: (a) at the end of a hearing on his ability to understand Spanish, featuring six witnesses, he could not say what the purpose of the hearing was, (b) at sentencing he consistently interrupted that he could not understand and did not feel capable of speaking to the court in Spanish. Did the proceedings against Gutierrez proceed in a language other than his primary language and inhibit his comprehension such that they were fundamentally unfair? i