CAAF Opinion Digest · one opinion, every topic
U.S. v. Taylor, 64 M.J. 416
Decided Apr 5, 2007 · No. 06-0319/MC · 2007 Term · Opinion (PDF)
Digested under 3 topics
Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Privileges › Generally
- testimonial privileges must be strictly construed and accepted only to the very limited extent that permitting a refusal to testify or excluding relevant evidence has a public good transcending the normally predominant principle of utilizing all rational means for ascertaining the truth
Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Privileges › Husband-wife privilege
- MRE 504 sets out the marital privileges applicable to trials by courts-martial; with respect to the privilege of confidential communications made during the marriage, it provides that a person has a privilege during and after the marital relationship to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from disclosing, any confidential communication made to the spouse of the person while they were husband and wife and not separated as provided by law; however, the privilege does not apply in proceedings in which one spouse is charged with a crime against the person or property of the other spouse or a child of either, or with a crime against the person or property of a third person committed in the course of committing a crime against the other spouse
- for the purposes of MRE 504, adultery is a crime against the person of the other spouse
- an accused may not invoke the spousal confidential communications privilege and thereby prevent his wife from testifying to his admission to committing adultery
Miscellaneous Matters: Manual for Courts-Martial: Generally
- in construing the language of a rule, it is generally understood that the words should be given their common and approved usage
Source and status
This is a verbatim mirror of the Opinion Digest and opinions tables published by the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The headnotes are the court staff’s summaries of the opinions, reproduced as published; they are not the opinions themselves and not this site’s commentary. Nothing here is edited on this site.
Last updated by the court: Oct 13, 2026 · mirrored Oct 29, 2026 · Always confirm a holding against the opinion itself (linked from each case name).