The
uniform rules of evidence were promulgated in 1974 with the primary role of
achieving uniformity of the law in all states
(Barnhart, 1963). The National
Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Law (NCCUSL) is attributed with
the introduction of the law. The law provides unity of state rules of evidence
in relation to federal rules of evidence.
This is achieved through simplification and codification of rules on
what is regarded evidence in any criminal or civil trial in a law court. In criminal proceedings, a spouse of an
accused has the privilege to refuse to testify against the accused spouse.
However, the privilege is not extended to encapsulate civil proceedings where
the spouses are adverse parties. Another
exception of the privilege is criminal proceedings where a prima facie
indicates that the spouses were jointly involved in committing a criminal offence
(Gard, 1956).
Trammel v. United States,
Supreme Court of the United States, 1980.
The
traditional common law privilege was modified permitting the accused to render
his spouse incompetent to testify in criminal federal cases. Trammel was
accused for conspiracy and heroin importation
(Mullane, 1995). To put his case in trial, his spouse was given federal
immunity in exchange for her testimony. Trammel asserted the testimonial
privilege that disqualified his wife from testifying against him. However, the
court denied the motion permitting the wife to testify in actions she witnessed
during the marriage that implicated the third parties. The appeal granted
certiorari and held. The testimonial privilege enables the defendant to
disqualify his spouse from testifying. It is an evidentiary rule that is
founded on policy and not a constitutional right. Therefore, the defendant can
invoke the privilege irrespective of the content or nature of the testimony on
account that the criminal offence occurred when they were married legally (Caselaw.lp.findlaw.com, 2014). When a spouse
is the witness, they may adversely refuse to testify and may not be compelled
to do so.
References
Barnhart, R. (1963).
Privilege in the Uniform Rules of Evidence. Ohio
St. LJ, 24, 131.
Caselaw.lp.findlaw.com,.
(2014). FindLaw | Cases and
Codes. Retrieved 16 September 2014, from
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=445&invol=40
Gard, S. (1956). Uniform
Rules of Evidence. Tul. L.
Rev., 31, 19.
Mullane, M. (1995).
Trammel v. United States: Bad History, Bad Policy, and Bad Law. Me. L. Rev.,47, 105.
EmoticonEmoticon