31 preliminary hearing, to assess the evidence that is introduced, and to determine the existence of the facts and the legal assessment thereof.182 123. On March 9, 2009 Luis and Enrique Archbold Jay filed a new motion for review of conviction alleging violation of due process and of the right to a defense on the grounds of failure to arraign them and take their initial statement. They also contended that they were denied a request to have an interpreter because they do not speak Spanish.183 124. On July 10, 2009, the Court of Criminal Cassation of Cartago found inadmissible the argument pertaining to the failure to provide a translator. 184 It noted that in different steps of the investigation and proceedings that were conducted both in the preliminary investigation and the intermediate phases and subsequently during the proceedings of cassation and review, no request had ever been made to appoint a translator.185 However, it did find the argument pertaining to the failure to take a preliminary statement to be admissible for examination by the court and ordered a hearing to be held.186 Said hearing was held on August 25, 2010 and subsequently the Court of Criminal Cassation denied the petition for review of conviction.187 125. By the account of the petitioners, in October and December 2011, Luis and Enrique Archbold Jay had finished serving the sentence imposed on them and, therefore, were deported back to Colombia.188 4. Jorge Martínez Meléndez 126. On August 21, 1998, the Office of the Deputy Prosecuting Attorney for Economic, Corruption and Tax Offenses brought formal charges against Jorge Martínez Meléndez, Sigifredo Martínez Meléndez, Marvin Martínez Meléndez and Heber di Bella Hidalgo for the crime of embezzlement of public funds in abuse of the Program of Social Compensation and Land Titling and the State.189 The Office of the Prosecuting Attorney claimed that improper payments had been made with funds from said program and that the monetary loss stemmed from Mr. Martínez, who was appointed 182 Annex 82. Decision No. 438-25-24 of the Court of Criminal Cassation of the Second Judicial Circuit of San José, dated July 5, 2007. Annex to petitioners’ communication of August 20, 2007. 183 Annex 83. Submission of motion for review, dated March 9, 2009. Annex to petitioners’ communication of September 10, 2009. 184 Annex 84. Decision No. 2009-0191 of the Court of Criminal Cassation of Cartago, dated July 10, 2009. Annex to petitioners’ communication of September 10, 2009. 185 Annex 84. Decision No. 2009-0191 of the Court of Criminal Cassation of Cartago, dated July 10, 2009. Annex to petitioners’ communication of September 10, 2009. 186 Annex 84. Decision No. 2009-0191 of the Court of Criminal Cassation of Cartago, dated July 10, 2009. Annex to petitioners’ communication of September 10, 2009. 187 Annex 85. Opinion 2009-0251 of Court of Criminal Cassation of Cartago, dated August 25, 2009. Annex to petitioners’ communication of September 10, 2009. 188 189 Annex 86. Petitioners’ communication of April 17, 2012. Annex 87. Decision of the Criminal Court of the First Judicial Circuit of San José, dated December 3, 2003. Annex to petitioner’s communication received at the IACHR on October 11, 2006.