Facts: Petitioner James Robbins was convicted of grand larceny in the Superior Court for King County after the trial court admitted testimony from Robbins’ wife that she had applied for a license plate and certificate of title under a false name for an automobile that Robbins had stolen while Robbins waited outside. Robbins appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court of Washington, asserting that Washington Revised Statutes §1214(1), which prohibits spouses from offering testimony regarding communications made by one spouse to the other without the other’s consent, rendered the testimony of his wife inadmissible and that he should have been able to cross-examine his wife so as to demonstrate her bias as a witness due to their pending divorce.

Question(s): Did the testimony of Robbins’ wife regarding her application for a license plate and certificate of title while Robbins waited outside constitute testimony regarding spousal communication?

If not, should Robbins have been permitted to cross-examine his wife so as to demonstrate her bias?

Conclusion: Justice Hamley’s opinion for the Court reversed the trial court’s decision and ordered a new trial as the Court ruled that the testimony of Robbins’ wife was partially inadmissible under §1214(1). In particular, the Court held that §1214(1) barred not only testimony by a spouse relating to verbal and written communications between spouses but any testimony by a spouse conveying information obtained by virtue of the confidence that exists between spouses. Thus, as Robbins would not have waited outside while his wife applied for a license plate and certificate of title under a false name for an automobile he stole if not for his confidence that his wife would not betray his presence, that part of his wife’s testimony was inadmissible. The Court also held that Robbins had the right, within the discretion of the trial court as to scope, to cross-examine his wife so as to impeach the credibility of the remainder of her testimony.

Docket No. 31034

Petitioner: James Robbins

(Counsel: Geoffrey H. Crandell)

Respondent: State of Washington

(Counsel: Charles O. Carroll and Burton S. Robbins)

Decided: Friday, January 6th, 1950

Vote: 4-1

Opinion: 35 Wn.2d 389 (1950)

Court: Simpson3 Court (1949-1950)

Simpson

Robinson

Mallery

Schwellenbach

Hill

Beals

Grady

Hamley

Donworth