Pereira v. United States - 347 U.S. 1, 74 S. Ct. 358 (1954)

Rule:

Although marital communications are presumed to be confidential, that presumption may be overcome by proof of facts showing that they were not intended to be private. The presence of a third party negatives the presumption of privacy. So too, the intention that the information conveyed be transmitted to a third person. The privilege, generally, extends only to utterances, and not to acts. 

Facts:

The defendants, in close association, engaged in a fraudulent scheme to obtain money from a woman, whom one of the defendants married, and left after the purpose of the scheme was accomplished. While the marriage lasted, the husband obtained from the victim a check drawn by her on a Los Angeles bank and endorsed it for collection to a Texas bank. After a trial, at which the victim, who in the meantime had obtained a divorce, testified, both defendants were convicted of the substantive offense of violating, the husband as a principal and the other defendant as an abettor, the mail fraud statute and the National Stolen Property Act, and of a conspiracy to commit these offenses.

Issue:

Did the privilege of marital communications bar the wife's testimony?

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The United States Supreme Court affirmed, holding, inter alia, that the privilege for confidential marital communications did not apply to the victim's testimony at trial because it either involved acts, as opposed to utterances, or statements made in the presence of third parties. To constitute violations of 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 1341, 2314, the Court held, the evidence at trial needed only to show that petitioners caused a check to be mailed or transported, not that they did it themselves. The Court further held that the commission of the substantive offenses and conspiracy to commit them were separate and distinct crimes, and petitioners' pleas of double jeopardy were no defense to their convictions.