Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 19-3002 (2026)
Husband and wife as witnesses.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Husband and wife as witnesses.
Neither husband nor wife are competent witnesses for or against each other in a criminal action or proceeding to which one or both are parties, except:
1. With the consent of both, or
2. In cases of criminal violence upon one by the other; or acts of physical injury upon a child of either the husband or the wife where the injury has been caused as a result of physical abuse or neglect by one or both of the parents; or to acts or attempted acts of lewd conduct with a minor child; or
3. In cases of desertion or nonsupport of wife or child by the husband.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases, 1960–2014 · leading case: State v. Martinez, 872 P.2d 708 (Idaho 1994).
State v. Martinez, 872 P.2d 708 (Idaho 1994). “According to Martinez, at that time the district court ruled that Spalding’s testimony was not admissible because I.C. § 19-3002 prohibited a wife from testifying against her husband without his consent.”
Dunlap v. State, 894 P.2d 134 (Idaho Ct. App. 1995). “504 and in violation of I.C. § 19-3002, which specifies that the spouse of the accused is not a competent witness in a criminal proceeding; and (2) that Crawford’s preliminary hearing testimony and potential trial testimony were inadmissible for the same reasons.”
State v. Swenor, 528 P.2d 671 (Idaho 1974). “I.C. § 19-3002; I.C. § 9-203; State v. McGonigal, 89 Idaho 177 , 403 P.”
State v. McKenney, 609 P.2d 1140 (Idaho 1980). “I.C. § 19-3002 provides that husband and wife are not competent witnesses against each other, with certain exceptions not applicable to this case.”
State v. McClellan, 532 P.2d 574 (Idaho 1975). “Appellant contends that admission of the taped statement constituted a violation of the marital privilege established by I.C. § 19-3002. However, that section provides that an individual can testify for or *577 against her spouse upon their mutual consent.”
State v. Riley, 362 P.2d 1075 (Idaho 1961). “If they were in fact husband and wife the testimony of said witness was barred by the provisions of I.C. § 19-3002, which are: “Neither husband nor wife are competent witnesses for or against each other in a criminal action or proceeding to which one or both are parties, except:…”
State v. Scroggie, 714 P.2d 72 (Idaho Ct. App. 1986). “I.C. § 19-3002. The jury was instructed that it could find Scroggie not guilty, guilty of first degree murder, guilty of second degree murder, or guilty of voluntary manslaughter.”
State v. Dunlap, 848 P.2d 454 (Idaho Ct. App. 1993). “In support of his first contention, Dunlap argues that I.C. § 19-3002 provides that a spouse is incompetent as a witness for or against the other spouse in a criminal matter and that Crawford’s testimony did not fall into one of the exceptions of I.”
State v. Mauti, 3 A.3d 624 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2010). “505; Idaho Code Ann. § 19-3002 (2010); Ky. R. Evid.”
State v. Durst, 879 P.2d 603 (Idaho Ct. App. 1994). “Although Durst initially claimed that his wife’s testimony was privileged under I.R.E. 504, he abandoned that claim during a hearing on his motion in limine prior to trial.”
State v. McGonigal, 403 P.2d 745 (Idaho 1965). “Defendant immediately objected to her testimony on the ground that she was disqualified as a witness by reason of I.C. § 19-3002, 1 which objection was sustained.”
McClellan v. State, 603 P.2d 1016 (Idaho 1979). “§ 19-3002 states: “Husband and wife as witnesses.”
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.