Can a person recieve proper due process if they do not understand the process?
Due process has nothing to do with whether the process is fair or not. It has to do with whether the process is authorized by law.
The due process clause has its roots in the Magna Carta, which provided, "'No Freeman shall be taken, or imprisoned or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled ... [except] by the Law of the Land." According to English common law, the term "due process of law" and "by the Law of the Land" were synonymous. This is indicated by the fact that later statutes used the terms interchangably. One statute passed in 1350 declared, "none shall be imprisoned nor put out of his Freehold ... unless it be by the Law of the Land"; another in 1363 enacted, "no man be taken or imprisoned, nor put out of his freehold, without process of law."
In 1642, Lord Chief Justice Coke confirmed that "due process of law" and "by the Law of the Land" meant the same. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed, holding in
Murray's Lessee v. Hoboken Land & Improv. Co. (1856), that "The words, 'due process of law,' were undoubtedly intended to convey the same meaning as the words 'by the law of the land.'"
Thus, when a state legislature has made a law, that law becomes "the law of the land," and the procedures prescribed by that law become "due process." The due process clause never restricts the actions of the legislature. It only prevents the executive and judicial branches from acting contrary to the law.