In Re Grand Jury Investigation. Vickie Hipes (A Witness) v. United States

Mrs. Vickie Hipes asserted her marital communications and testimonial privileges in refusing to answer a question about her husband’s activities before a federal grand jury. The district court rejected her claim of privilege, ordered her to answer the question, and upon her refusal, the district court adjudged her in contempt.

After Mrs. Hipes was granted immunity, she answered many questions asked by the grand jury. She refused to answer the question: “What are the job responsibilities of your husband at Siesta Catering?” Both before the grand jury and the district court, Mrs. Hipes relied upon her claim of both the marital communications privilege and the marital testimonial privilege. The federal courts have long recognized both marital privileges. The testimonial privilege permits either spouse, upon objection, to exclude adverse testimony by the other, with certain exceptions not pertinent here. (See, e. g., Hawkins v. United States (1958) 358 U.S. 74, 75-78 , 79 S.Ct. 136 , 3 L.Ed.2d 125 ; United States v. Lustig (9th Cir. 1977) 555 F.2d 737, 747 .) The marital communications privilege permits either spouse, or an ex-spouse, to assert the privilege to bar testimony…