statement was admissible to explain the words of the defendant’s public admission, “Yes”; statement gave meaning to the defendant’s otherwise incomprehensible statement
How later courts described this case
- statement was admissible to explain the words of the defendant’s public admission, “Yes”; statement gave meaning to the defendant’s otherwise incomprehensible statement
- recognizing the third-party exception to marital privilege
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MR. JUSTICE DOOLEY, also dissenting:
I join in the very persuasive opinions of Mr. Chief Justice Ward and Mr. Justice Goldenhersh. There was no voluntary waiver of a substantial right by the defendant. This error is of such consequence as to justify a new trial, absent such cunning stratagems as were employed here.