State v. Bradley: Broad Inapplicability of Spousal Privilege in RSA Chapter 632-A Proceedings

Introduction

In State v. Bradley, 2025 N.H. 19, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire addressed the scope of RSA 632-A:5, a statute that removes the spousal communications privilege in prosecutions under the State’s sexual assault laws. Kenneth Bradley, charged with aggravated felonious sexual assault and related offenses under RSA chapter 632-A, sought to exclude an audio recording of a private conversation with his wife. The trial court denied his motion, concluding that RSA 632-A:5 rendered the privilege inapplicable. Bradley appealed, challenging that interpretation. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the plain language of RSA 632-A:5 makes the spousal privilege unavailable in all proceedings under chapter 632-A, regardless of whether the spouse is the victim.

Summary of the Judgment

The Court’s unanimous per curiam opinion analyzed RSA 632-A:5 and New Hampshire Rule of Evidence 504 (the spousal communications privilege). RSA 632-A:5 provides that “laws attaching a privilege against the disclosure of communications between husband and wife are inapplicable to proceedings under this chapter.” The Court concluded:

RSA 632-A:5 unambiguously extends beyond spousal-victim scenarios and applies to every prosecution under RSA chapter 632-A.
The statute’s second sentence is plain: it abolishes spousal privilege for “proceedings under this chapter,” not merely those in which the spouse is a complainant.
Judicial resort to legislative history or the statute’s title was unnecessary, as the language is clear and complete.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court’s order refusing to exclude the audio recording and remanded for further proceedings.

Analysis

1. Precedents Cited

State v. Carpentino, 166 N.H. 9 (2014): Established that statutory interpretation is a legal question reviewed de novo, requiring courts to give words their plain and ordinary meaning and to refrain from adding language not chosen by the legislature.
State v. Hess Corp., 159 N.H. 256 (2009): Permits appellate courts to accept facts as presented in an interlocutory appeal statement and rely on the record as needed.
State v. Beattie, 173 N.H. 716 (2020): Held that when a statute’s language is clear and unambiguous, legislative history is not consulted.
State v. Kilgus, 125 N.H. 739 (1984): Confirmed that the title of a statute is not conclusive when interpreting unambiguous legislative text.

2. Legal Reasoning

The Court’s statutory analysis proceeded in three logical steps:

Plain Language: RSA 632-A:5 comprises two sentences. The first acknowledges that sexual assault convictions can be obtained against a spouse; the second states that spousal privilege “are inapplicable to proceedings under this chapter.” The Court read “this chapter” to mean RSA chapter 632-A in its entirety.
Statutory Context: The Court examined the chapter’s title (“Sexual Assault and Related Offenses”) and the array of offenses it encompasses, noting that many do not involve spouse-to-spouse conduct. This confirms that the privilege exception is not limited to marital victims.
Absence of Ambiguity: Because the statute is clear, the Court refused to import narrower qualifiers or resort to legislative history. The Court declined to rewrite the statute so that privilege would only be inapplicable when the spouse is the complainant.

3. Impact on Future Cases

Prosecutorial Strategy: Prosecutors may introduce spousal communications in any RSA chapter 632-A prosecution, even if the spouse is not the alleged victim.
Defense Considerations: Defendants charged under RSA chapter 632-A cannot rely on spousal communications privilege under Rule 504 for any recorded or testimonial evidence shared with their spouse.
Legislative Clarity: The decision may prompt legislators to revisit RSA 632-A:5 if they intended a narrower application, or to leave the statute unchanged to preserve broad admissibility.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Spousal Communications Privilege: A rule (N.H. R. Ev. 504) that generally prevents one spouse from testifying about private communications with the other, designed to protect marital harmony.
Interlocutory Appeal: An appeal taken before a trial concludes, often used to resolve threshold evidentiary or jurisdictional issues.
Statutory Interpretation de Novo: A fresh review by an appellate court of the legal questions regarding the meaning of legislative text, without deference to lower court rulings.

Conclusion

State v. Bradley affirms a clear and expansive exception to spousal privilege in New Hampshire’s sexual assault statutes. By enforcing the plain text of RSA 632-A:5, the Supreme Court eliminated any ambiguity about whether a defendant can shield private marital communications in any chapter 632-A prosecution. This decision underscores the judiciary’s commitment to apply statutes as written and signals to litigants and lawmakers the importance of precise legislative drafting when limiting evidentiary privileges.