(1) Neither husband nor wife can be examined in any case as to any confidential communication made by one to the other while married, nor shall they after the marriage relation ceases be permitted to reveal in testimony any such communication while the marriage subsisted except as otherwise provided by law. This privilege may be waived only with the consent of both spouses. After the death of one, it may be waived by the survivor.
For purposes of this section (a) a confidential communication shall mean a communication which is made privately by any person to his or her spouse with no intention that such communication be disclosed to any other person and (b) communication shall include any action on the part of a spouse if the action reasonably appears to have been intended to communicate a message from one spouse to the other.
(2) During the existence of the marriage, a husband and wife can in no criminal case be a witness against the other. This privilege may be waived only with the consent of both spouses.
(3) These privileges may not be claimed:
(a) In any criminal case where the crime charged is a crime of violence, bigamy, incest, or any crime committed by one against the person or property of the other or of a child of either or in any criminal prosecution against the husband for wife or child abandonment;
(b) In any case brought by either husband or wife against a third person relating to their marriage relationship or the interruption of or interference with such relationship; or
(c) In any case brought by either husband or wife against the other for divorce or annulment of the marriage or for support.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
30
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 1938–2025 · leading case:
State v. Palmer, 399 N.W.2d 706 (Neb. 1986).
State v. Palmer, 399 N.W.2d 706 (Neb. 1986).
· cites it 30× “It was her testimony in the second trial which we found to be contrary to the provisions of Neb.Rev.Stat. § 27-505 (Reissue 1979), and we accordingly set aside the conviction and remanded the cause for a third trial.”
State v. Palmer, 600 N.W.2d 756 (Neb. 1999).
· cites it 26× “PALMER III Following our opinion in Palmer II, but before the third trial, § 27-505 was amended so that in criminal cases involving crimes of violence, one spouse could testify against another.”
State v. Palmer, 338 N.W.2d 281 (Neb. 1983).
· cites it 18× “We need not consider all of the errors, because if one of his assigned errors, that the trial court erred in permitting his “former wife,” Cheri Palmer, to testify against him, in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505 (2) (Reissue 1979), is correct, then we are required by law…”
State v. Burchett, 399 N.W.2d 258 (Neb. 1986).
· cites it 10× “The motion was sustained on the ground that application of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505 (Reissue 1985), as amended by 1984 Neb.”
State v. Hunt, 371 N.W.2d 708 (Neb. 1985).
· cites it 8× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 27-505 (Cum.Supp.1984). He urges that preserving the privilege in nonviolent crimes and abolishing it in violent ones constitutes special class legislation in violation of Neb.”
State v. Beehn, 303 Neb. 172 (Neb. 2019).
· cites it 2× “18 See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505 (Reissue 2016). See, also, State v.”
Trammel v. United States, 445 U.S. 40 (1980).
· cites it 2× “§ 46-16-212 (1979); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505 (1975); Nev. Rev.”
Imig v. March, 279 N.W.2d 382 (Neb. 1979).
· cites it 4× “" What effect that had in Emerson is not revealed with any certainty, but in any event, that statute has been repealed and replaced by section 27-505, R.R.S.1943, which limits the prohibition to "any confidential communication.”
State v. Vicars, 299 N.W.2d 421 (Neb. 1980).
· cites it 4× “The defendant argues that Neb.Rev.Stat. § 27-505 (Reissue 1979) established a privilege which may be waived only with the consent of both spouses.”
State v. Christian, 841 A.2d 1158 (Conn. 2004).
· cites it 3× “§ 26-1-802 (2003); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505 (1) (1995); Nev.”
State v. Oliveira-Coutinho, 304 Neb. 147 (Neb. 2019).
· cites it 2× “With regard to the marital privilege, the court noted that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505 (3)(a) (Reissue 2016) provides that the marital privilege may not be claimed in a criminal case where the crime charged is “a crime of violence.”
Palmer v. Clarke, 293 F. Supp. 2d 1011 (D. Neb. 2003).
· cites it 3× “The amended spousal privilege is not concerned with distinguishing between persons, but between crimes. The amendment allowed spousal testimony to be admitted in future trials for violent crimes.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505(1) — 3 cases
State v. Burchett, 399 N.W.2d 258 (Neb. 1986).
“The motion was sustained on the ground that application of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505 (Reissue 1985), as amended by 1984 Neb.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505(2) — 4 cases
State v. Palmer, 338 N.W.2d 281 (Neb. 1983).
“We need not consider all of the errors, because if one of his assigned errors, that the trial court erred in permitting his “former wife,” Cheri Palmer, to testify against him, in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505 (2) (Reissue 1979), is correct, then we are required by law…”
State v. Burchett, 399 N.W.2d 258 (Neb. 1986).
“The motion was sustained on the ground that application of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505 (Reissue 1985), as amended by 1984 Neb.”
State v. Palmer, 600 N.W.2d 756 (Neb. 1999).
“PALMER III Following our opinion in Palmer II, but before the third trial, § 27-505 was amended so that in criminal cases involving crimes of violence, one spouse could testify against another.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505(3) — 2 cases
State v. Palmer, 600 N.W.2d 756 (Neb. 1999).
“PALMER III Following our opinion in Palmer II, but before the third trial, § 27-505 was amended so that in criminal cases involving crimes of violence, one spouse could testify against another.”
State v. Burchett, 399 N.W.2d 258 (Neb. 1986).
“The motion was sustained on the ground that application of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505 (Reissue 1985), as amended by 1984 Neb.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505(3)(A) — 1 case
Palmer v. Clarke, 293 F. Supp. 2d 1011 (D. Neb. 2003).
“The amended spousal privilege is not concerned with distinguishing between persons, but between crimes. The amendment allowed spousal testimony to be admitted in future trials for violent crimes.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505(3)(a) — 3 cases
State v. Burchett, 399 N.W.2d 258 (Neb. 1986).
“The motion was sustained on the ground that application of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505 (Reissue 1985), as amended by 1984 Neb.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505(a)(2) — 1 case
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-505(a)(3)(a) — 1 case
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.