Document: 358 U.S. 74 79 S.Ct. 136 3 L.Ed.2d 125 James Clifton HAWKINS, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES of America. No. 20. Argued Oct. 14, 1958. Decided Nov. 24, Messrs. Kenneth R. King and Byron Tunnell, Tyler, Tex., for petitioner. Mr. Kirby W. Patterson, respondent. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion Court. 1 Petitioner was convicted sentenced to five years imprisonment by a United States District Court in Oklahoma on charge that he violated Mann Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2421, U.S.C.A. transporting girl from Arkansas immoral purposes. Over petitioner's objection permitted Government use his wife as witness against him.1 Relying Yoder v. States, 80 F.2d 665, Appeals Tenth Circuit held this not error. 249 735. As other Courts have followed long-standing rule evidence which bars husband or testifying her spouse,2 we granted certiorari. 355 925, 78 383, 2 356. The common-law rule, accepted at an early date controlling country, were incompetent witnesses each other. rested mainly desire foster peace family general unwillingness testimony tempted strong self-interest testify falsely. Since defendant barred own behalf because interest, it quite natural bar spouse view prevailing legal fiction one person. See Coke, Commentary upon Littleton (19th ed. 1832), 6. b. yielded exceptions certain types cases, however. Thus, Stein Bowman, 13 Pet. 209, 10 L.Ed. 129, while recognizing 'general neither nor can be other,' noted does apply 'where commits offence person wife.' page 221. But emphasized no exception left spouses free merely they so desired. 223.3 Aside slight variations application, despite many critical comments, stated Bowman federal courts until 1933 when decided Funk 290 371, 54 212, 369.4 That case rejected phase commonlaw excluded recognized basic reason underlying exclusion had been practice disqualifying with personal interest outcome case. Widespread disqualifications however, long since abolished both country England accordance modern trend interested jury assess their credibility. Certainly, defendants uniformly allowed behalf, there longer good prevent them using witnesses. With original barring favorable gone concluded aspect old should go too. 4 case, did criticize either exclude adverse other, but question open further scrutiny. 373, 212; Griffin 336 704, 714—715, 69 814, 818—819, 93 993. More recently, Congress has confirmed authority asserted determine admissibility under 'principles common law may interpreted * light experience.' Fed.Rules Crim.Proc., 26, here suggest authority, experience requires us wholly reject forbidding It ask modify will compelled do voluntarily. Nothing Court's cases supports such distinction between voluntary testimony, emphatically supra, leading American statement principles rests. 223. Consequently, if are urges, must look reason, authority. 5 While supported reasons time changing practices undermined, prepared say same about refused pit trial where life liberty is stake belief policy necessary peace, only benefit husband, children, public well. Such never unreasonable now. Moreover, difficult see how harmony less disturbed wife's than testimony. In truth, seems probable much more bitterness would engendered compelled. argues fact testifies voluntarily indication marriage already gone. Doubtless often true. all marital flare-ups wants hurt permanent. widespread success achieved throughout conciliating differences real some apparently broken homes saved provided unforgivable act done party. Adverse given criminal proceedings would, think, likely destroy almost any marriage. 6 Of course, pointed out exclusionary worked apparent injustice. Court, decision its rule-making power, 3771, change circumstances dictates. fact, specific changes made time. evolved Common-law absolute disqualification unless consent. supra; Benson 146 325, 331—333; Mitchell, Cir., 137 1006, 1008. 1887 enabled prosecutions bigamy, polygamy unlawful cohabitation. 24 Stat. 635. Miles 103 304, 315—316, 26 481. Similarly, 1917, again 1952, wives husbands competent importing aliens 39 878 (1917), re-enacted 66 230, 8 1328 (1952), 1328. 7 Other jurisdictions reluctant rule. English statutes permit crimes. Evidence Spouses Criminal Cases, 99 Sol.J. 551. And most retain though provide classes cases.5 limited nature these shows still belief, grounded present conditions, force encourage might alienate wife, inflame existing domestic differences. Under unable subscribe idea based persistent instincts several centuries now abandoned. indicated, foreclose whatever eventually dictated 'reason Notwithstanding error admitting urged affirm conviction alternative holding harmless 52(a). after examining record cannot substantial influence jury. Kotteakos 328 750, 764—765, 1239, 1247—1248, 90 1557. Interstate transportation prosecutrix conceded, factual issue whether dominant purpose making trip facilitate prostitution Tulsa, Oklahoma.6 testified petitioner agreed take Tulsa she could earn money working prostitute woman called 'Jane Wilson.' denied intention part engage activity testified, effect, accommodation incidental business City, Oklahoma. Petitioner's thus sharply contested which, record, resolved way depending largely believed placed Wilson' stand. response questions Assistant Attorney swore took Tulsa. Not satisfied prosecutor brought first redirect examination before married mere presence kind impress jurors adversely. When added sworn sure evidence, cumulative, tip scales close vital prime motivation interstate immoral. Krulewitch 440, 444—445, 716, 718—719, 790. At least, suggestion probably man whom perfectly natural. 9 Reversed. STEWART concurring. 11 asked re-examine 'sentimental relic.'1 born two concepts rejected: one. What began gradually relevant become simply privilege him. Compare 129; Wolfle 291 7, 279, 280, 617; 369.2 12 Any impedes discovery truth court well doing justice. product conceptualism ago discarded, universally criticized scholars, qualified abandoned jurisdictions, receive careful scrutiny.3 Surely experience' require indulge assumptions, perhaps naive importance ancient interests tranquillity.4 argue testimonial withdrawn. We hold accused. him, so. 14 A primary difficulty Government's contention hardly advance it. supplemental filed subsequent oral argument imprisoned material released $3,000 bond conditioned appearance States. These consistent theory voluntary. serve emphasize advanced not, argues, create 'a standard great advantage simplicity.' On contrary, administer easy abuse. Seldom simple matter spouse's really voluntary, ways compel subtle issuance subpoena, just cogent. Upon issues presented us, I therefore concur decision. appear offered husband. e.g., Paul 561; Brunner 168 281; Walker, 176 564. civil action involving conversations shows, concerned broader involved. See, 305, 481; Graves 150 118, 40, 37 1021; Jin Fuey Moy 254 189, 41 98, 65 214. 331—333, 60, 61—62, 36 991. For criticism Bentham, Rationale Judicial (Bowring 1843), 480—486; Wigmore, (3d 1940), §§ 600—620; id., 2227—2245; Hutchins Slesinger, Some Observations Law Evidence: Family Relations, Minn.L.Rev. 675. 488; 2240; Note, 38 Va.L.Rev. 359, 362—367. provides: 'Whoever knowingly transports foreign commerce debauchery, 'Shall find $5,000 years, both.' construing held: 'The statute aims penalize those who toward accomplishing An women girls shall conduct outlawed Section found exist conclusion journey motive movement. designed bring result. Without motivation, during following insufficient subject transporter penalties Act. '* Act calculated means effectuating sexual immorality.' Mortensen 322 369, 374—375, 64 1037, 1040—1041, 88 1331. Cleveland 329 19—20, 67 13, 15 16, 91 12. Cf. Hansen Haff, 559, 563, 494, 495, 968. Comment, Rule 23(2) Uniform Rules Evidence. dealing different covering confidential communications wife. 617. Apparently nineteen substantially modified privilege. 365. process selective one, accomplished legislation. 1938, Bar Association's Committee Improvements favored abolition accused, 63 A.B.A.Rep. 595. facts illustrate unrealistic assumption be. acts complained living apart him assumed name. also apart. referred 'exwife,' explaining counsel corrected lived together very much. Before assuming work wholesale disruption felicity implies, helpful know modified. views system actual operation rule—the district judges members practicing bar. Conferences Circuits appropriate forums imparting experience. 28 333, 333. obvious, data intelligent formulation 'in single litigated This points wisdom establishing continuing body study recommend uniform rules courts, proposed least Conferences. Annual Report Proceedings Conference September 18—20, 1957, p. 43. Joiner, Federal Courts. 20 F.R.D. 429.

Category: 0