Cal. Codes » Evidence Code
California Codes

Cal. Evidence Code § 980 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subject to Section 912 and except as otherwise provided in this article, a spouse (or his or her guardian or conservator when he or she has a guardian or conservator), whether or not a party, has a privilege during the marital or domestic partnership relationship and afterwards to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from disclosing, a communication if he or she claims the privilege and the communication was made in confidence between him or her and the other spouse while they were spouses.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 64 cases (14 in the last 5 years), 1969–2025 · leading case: People v. Bryant, Smith & Wheeler, 334 P.3d 573 (Cal. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Bryant, Smith & Wheeler, 334 P.3d 573 (Cal. 2014). · cites it 5× “(Evid. Code, § 980.)40 The trial court properly found the statements were not ―made in confidence‖ as required by the statute.”
People v. Cleveland, 86 P.3d 302 (Cal. 2004). · cites it 4× “(Evid.Code, § 980.) Neither Cleveland nor Charan suggested at trial that they wanted to admit this evidence at the guilt phase.”
North v. Superior Court, 502 P.2d 1305 (Cal. 1972). · cites it 10× “), and husband-wife (Evid. Code, § 980 et seq.), [4] by creating a statutory privilege in favor of the client, patient, penitent or husband/wife to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from disclosing, a confidential communication with his attorney, physician,…”
People v. Von Villas, 92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9290 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 6× “California Evidence Code Section 980, the Privilege for Confidential Marital Communications, Provides No Remedy for Ford Evidence Code section 980 states, in pertinent part: "Subject to Section 912 and except as otherwise provided in this article, a spouse .”
People v. Kelly, 800 P.2d 516 (Cal. 1990). · cites it 2× “(Evid. Code, § 980.) As a result of the court's ruling, defendant entered into the following stipulation.”
Brown v. State, 753 A.2d 84 (Md. 2000). · cites it 4× “§§ 12-2232, 13-4062 (West 1999); Cal. Evid.Code § 980 (West 1995); Fla. Stat.”
People v. Badgett, 895 P.2d 877 (Cal. 1995). · cites it 2× “The more significant of these statements, of course, were his preoffense statement that he wondered whether he should "off" the victim and his postoffense statements describing the murder to Jasik.”
People v. Bogle, 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9922 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 3× “Code, § 970) and the confidential marital communications privilege (Evid. Code, § 980) apply. This contention is without merit.”
People v. Sinohui, 47 P.3d 629 (Cal. 2002). “(Evid. Code, § 980.) Despite recognizing these privileges, the Legislature has enacted numerous exceptions.”
State v. Christian, 841 A.2d 1158 (Conn. 2004). · cites it 2× “504 (LexisNexis 2003); Cal. Evid. Code § 980 (Deering 1986); Colo.”
People v. Gallego, 802 P.2d 169 (Cal. 1990). “Marital communication privilege Defendant renews his claim that Charlene’s testimony should have been excluded under the privilege for confidential marital communications (Evid. Code, § 980), and that her testimony was not within “crime or fraud” exception (id.”
United States v. James Montgomery, United States of Am. v. Mary O'COnnOr, 384 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2004). “§ 16-41-101 (Rule 504); Cal. Evid.Code § 980; Del. R. Evid. 504; D.”
Show all 64 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.