Rubalcada v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a husband's threat to do violence to his wife was not a privileged communication because it did not enhance the mutual trust and confidence of the marital relationship
• noting that a prosecutor must disclose “any agreement made with the State’s witness, such as promises, grants of immunity, or reward offered in return for testimony”
• considering together defendant's claimed violations of his rights to due process and compulsory process
• considering together defendant’s claimed violations of his rights to due process and compulsory process
• “A prosecutor must disclose to the jury any agreement made with the State’s witness, such as promises, grants of immunity, or reward offered in return for testimony.”
• defendant’s threats to kill wife and whatever she loved most if she disclosed facts about murder he committed not barred by spousal privilege because “[s]uch communications do not enhance the mutual trust and confidence of the marital relationship that the privilege is intended to protect”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).