## Facts

- Leon Seminole, an enrolled member of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, was prosecuted in federal court for conduct occurring in Indian country.
- Seminole was charged with assault and strangulation of his wife, Maxine Limberhand, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 113(a)(7) and 113(a)(8).
- Limberhand planned to move out and returned with family to retrieve belongings; a confrontation occurred at the home.
- A relative observed Limberhand injured and Seminole following her while holding a pistol; Limberhand urged leaving before someone was shot.
- Limberhand encountered a Bureau of Indian Affairs officer, was taken to the emergency room, and gave a statement describing being hit, kicked, and placed in a chokehold.
- Medical examination documented significant facial swelling and abrasions, a lacerated lip, a broken tooth, and other injuries.
- At trial, Limberhand did not wish to testify against Seminole; the district court compelled her testimony over an assertion of the adverse spousal testimonial privilege.
- A jury convicted Seminole on both counts, and he appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the adverse spousal testimonial privilege barred compelling the testimony of a defendant’s spouse when the spouse is the alleged victim of the charged offenses.
2. Whether Trammel v. United States changed federal privilege law so as to abrogate Wyatt v. United States’s rule permitting compelled testimony by a victim-spouse.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the convictions.
- The court held the district court did not err by compelling Limberhand’s testimony because she was the alleged victim of the charged crimes.
- The court concluded Trammel did not overrule Wyatt’s victim-spouse exception and did not prevent compulsion in that context.

## Legal Principles

- Under federal common law, the adverse spousal testimonial privilege generally allows a spouse to refuse to testify adversely against the other spouse in a criminal case.
- Wyatt v. United States recognizes an exception: when the spouse is the victim of the charged offense, the court may compel the victim-spouse to testify.
- Trammel v. United States reallocates control of the privilege in the ordinary setting by limiting invocation of the privilege to the witness-spouse (preventing the defendant-spouse from barring voluntary testimony), but it does not eliminate Wyatt’s victim-spouse exception.
- When Supreme Court precedent addressing a specific privilege exception remains intact, a lower court may apply it notwithstanding later cases that modify the privilege in other respects.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit held that a federal court may compel a victim-spouse to testify against the defendant spouse and that Trammel’s modification of the adverse spousal testimonial privilege did not displace Wyatt’s victim-spouse exception; Seminole’s convictions were therefore affirmed.


United States v. Seminole, 865 F.3d 1150 (9th Cir. 2017)