NRS
49.295 Married person: General rule of privilege; exceptions.
1. Except as otherwise provided in
subsections 2 and 3 and NRS 49.305:
(a) A married person cannot be examined as a witness
for or against his or her spouse without his or her consent.
(b) No spouse can be examined, during the
marriage or afterwards, without the consent of the other spouse, as to any
communication made by one to the other during marriage.
2. The provisions of subsection 1 do not
apply to a:
(a) Civil proceeding brought by or on behalf of
one spouse against the other spouse;
(b) Proceeding to commit or otherwise place a
spouse, the property of the spouse or both the spouse and the property of the
spouse under the control of another because of the alleged mental or physical
condition of the spouse;
(c) Proceeding brought by or on behalf of a
spouse to establish his or her competence;
(d) Proceeding in the juvenile court or family
court pursuant to title 5 of NRS or NRS
432B.410 to 432B.590, inclusive;
or
(e) Criminal proceeding in which one spouse is
charged with:
(1) A crime against the person or the
property of the other spouse or of a child of either, or of a child in the
custody or control of either, whether the crime was committed before or during
marriage.
(2) Bigamy or incest.
(3) A crime related to abandonment of a
child or nonsupport of the other spouse or child.
3. The provisions of subsection 1 do not
apply in any criminal proceeding to events which took place before the spouses
were married.
(Added to NRS by 1971,
786; A 1977,
265; 1979,
460; 1985,
842, 1387;
1991,
458, 2177;
1993,
603; 2003,
593, 1115;
2017,
777; 2023,
2324; 2025,
2195)
Notes of Decisions
United States v. Banks (2009)
ca9 · cites it 6×
“§ 9-203 (1)) (precluding use of the privilege in "any case of physical injury to a child where the injury has been caused as a result of physical abuse or neglect by one or both of the parents" and "any case of lewd and lascivious conduct or attempted lewd and lascivious conduct…”
Donovan v. State (1978)
nev · cites it 6×
“NRS 49.295 provides that a wife cannot be examined as a witness for or against her husband without his consent.”
Peck v. State (2000)
nev · cites it 6×
“Peck claims this was a violation of the spousal privilege set forth in NRS 49.295. [1] A spouse has a statutory privilege to refuse to take the stand when called to testify against his or her spouse.”
Franco v. State (1993)
nev · cites it 4×
“NRS 49.295(1)(a). 7 This privilege belongs to the testifying spouse and *1244 in this case could only be waived by Kim if and when she took the stand.”
Meador v. State (1985)
nev · cites it 4×
“NRS 49.295 1 provides in pertinent part: 1.”
Foss v. State (1976)
nev · cites it 5×
“Appellant contends that NRS 49.295 prevented Francine from testifying to any communication, confidential or otherwise.”
Deutscher v. State (1979)
nev · cites it 2×
“NRS 49.295 (1) provides in pertinent part: (a) A husband cannot be examined as a witness for or against his wife without her consent, nor a wife for or against her husband without his consent.”
Fields v. State (2009)
nev · cites it 2×
“This defeats the expectation of confidentiality required to sustain Fields's claim of marital privilege under NRS 49.295 for these calls. Foss v. State, 92 Nev.”
Diaz v. Eighth Judicial District Court of Nevada (2000)
nev · cites it 2×
“252 (social worker-client privilege); NRS 49.295 (spousal privilege). [4] Generally, privileges relating to special relationships can be waived by the source of the confidential information, whose identity is usually known.”
Brown v. State (2000)
md · cites it 2×
“§ 27-505 (1995); Nev.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 49.295 (Michie 1996); N.”
Gallego v. State (1985)
nev
“NRS 49.295(l)(a). Therefore, if Charlene and Gallego were lawfully married, her testimony against Gallego would have violated the spousal privilege.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 49.295(1) — 2 cases
Deutscher v. State (1979)
nev
“NRS 49.295 (1) provides in pertinent part: (a) A husband cannot be examined as a witness for or against his wife without her consent, nor a wife for or against her husband without his consent.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 49.295(1)(a) — 4 cases
Franco v. State (1993)
nev
“NRS 49.295(1)(a). 7 This privilege belongs to the testifying spouse and *1244 in this case could only be waived by Kim if and when she took the stand.”
Peck v. State (2000)
nev
“Peck claims this was a violation of the spousal privilege set forth in NRS 49.295. [1] A spouse has a statutory privilege to refuse to take the stand when called to testify against his or her spouse.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 49.295(1)(b) — 7 cases
Franco v. State (1993)
nev
“NRS 49.295(1)(a). 7 This privilege belongs to the testifying spouse and *1244 in this case could only be waived by Kim if and when she took the stand.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 49.295(2)(d) — 3 cases
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 49.295(2)(e)(1) — 2 cases
United States v. Banks (2009)
ca9
“§ 9-203 (1)) (precluding use of the privilege in "any case of physical injury to a child where the injury has been caused as a result of physical abuse or neglect by one or both of the parents" and "any case of lewd and lascivious conduct or attempted lewd and lascivious conduct…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 49.295(2)(e)(2) — 1 case
United States v. Banks (2009)
ca9
“§ 9-203 (1)) (precluding use of the privilege in "any case of physical injury to a child where the injury has been caused as a result of physical abuse or neglect by one or both of the parents" and "any case of lewd and lascivious conduct or attempted lewd and lascivious conduct…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 49.295(2)(e)(l) — 1 case
United States v. Banks (2009)
ca9
“§ 9-203 (1)) (precluding use of the privilege in "any case of physical injury to a child where the injury has been caused as a result of physical abuse or neglect by one or both of the parents" and "any case of lewd and lascivious conduct or attempted lewd and lascivious conduct…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 49.295(b) — 1 case
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 49.295(e)(1) — 1 case
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 49.295(l)(a) — 4 cases
Gallego v. State (1985)
nev
“NRS 49.295(l)(a). Therefore, if Charlene and Gallego were lawfully married, her testimony against Gallego would have violated the spousal privilege.”
Franco v. State (1993)
nev
“NRS 49.295(1)(a). 7 This privilege belongs to the testifying spouse and *1244 in this case could only be waived by Kim if and when she took the stand.”
Peck v. State (2000)
nev
“Peck claims this was a violation of the spousal privilege set forth in NRS 49.295. [1] A spouse has a statutory privilege to refuse to take the stand when called to testify against his or her spouse.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 49.295(l)(b) — 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.