(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, in any criminal proceeding, a person may elect or refuse to testify against his or her then lawful spouse.
(b) The testimony of a spouse may be compelled, in the same manner as for any other witness, in a criminal proceeding against the other spouse for (1) joint participation with the spouse in criminal conduct, (2) bodily injury, sexual assault or other violence attempted, committed or threatened upon the spouse, or (3) bodily injury, sexual assault, risk of injury pursuant to section 53-21, or other violence attempted, committed or threatened upon the minor child of either spouse, or any minor child in the care or custody of either spouse.
(P.A. 80-313, S. 45; P.A. 11-152, S. 14.)
History: (Revisor's note: In 1993, obsolete reference to repealed Sec. 53-25 was deleted editorially by the Revisors); P.A. 11-152 replaced former provisions with Subsec. (a) authorizing person to elect or refuse to testify against then lawful spouse in any criminal proceeding and Subsec. (b) re when testimony of spouse may be compelled.
Cited. 199 C. 631; 211 C. 555. Section codifies adverse spousal testimony privilege, as distinguished from marital communications privilege, and the privilege belongs to the witness spouse and is meant to protect against impact of the testimony on the marriage. 267 C. 710.
Notes of Decisions
State v. Littlejohn, 508 A.2d 1376 (Conn. 1986).
· cites it 6× “The defendant stated that he did *648 not make any claim under General Statutes § 54-84a, 11 the so-called “spousal privilege,” which he claimed went to competency and was “completely irrelevant to this issue.”
State v. Christian, 841 A.2d 1158 (Conn. 2004).
· cites it 6× “” Rather, the state contends, the legislature has enacted “a reasonable compromise” by codifying the separate and distinct adverse marital testimonial privilege in General Statutes § 54-84a. 6 The state further argues that, *725 even if we recognize the marital communications…”
State v. James, 560 A.2d 426 (Conn. 1989).
· cites it 2× “General Statutes § 54-84a; see C. McCormick, Evidence (3d Ed.”
State v. Gordon, 497 A.2d 965 (Conn. 1985).
· cites it 2× “That privilege, embodied in General Statutes § 54-84a, protects private communications between a husband and wife, and can be waived by the testifying spouse at any time.”
State v. Beavers, 963 A.2d 956 (Conn. 2009).
“that evidentiary privileges are governed by § 5-1 of the Connecticut Code of Evidence, which provides: ‘Except as otherwise required by the constitution of the United States, the constitution of this state, the General Statutes or the Practice Book, privileges shall be governed…”
State v. Mauti, 3 A.3d 624 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2010).
“§ 13-90-107 (2009); Conn. Gen.Stat. § 54-84a* (2010); D.C.Code Ann.”
State v. James H. (Conn. App. Ct. 2014).
· cites it 6× “to 2003) § 54-84a, applied in this case’’ and thereafter admitted into evi- dence text messages sent between the defendant and his former wife, C.”
State v. Davaloo (Conn. 2016).
· cites it 2× “8 Because we decide the issue on the basis of our interpretation of the marital communication privilege, we need not address the state’s arguments regarding disclosure and waiver, which it has presented as alternative grounds for affirming the Appellate Court’s judgment.”
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.