Hi. My husband was arrested for domestic violence in Santa Clara County, CA. At his pre-trial, I was asked by the judge to be present at the trial which is on March 16.
I didn't receive a subpoena, so what happens if I don't show up? I don't want to testify against my husband, which is why I think they want me to show up. Please help!

I don't honestly know if a *request* from a judge is equivalent to a subpoena - you'd have to call the court clerk and ask, I guess.

But . . . . . . I'd think long and hard about whatever it was he did to you. In general, they need to hear truth, both defendant and court. You hiding from it does no good for anyone, including you.

I'm thinkin' that the judge's "request" is actually an order of the court and that you should be present- A subpeona, in most matters before a court, is issued at the request of either the plaintiff or respondant... it would be unusual for the bench to issue a subpeona of its own accord, but when the judge tells you verbally, on the record, that your presence is desired, it's not really optional 9 times out of 10.

Appear as requested, answer the questions put to you honestly and don't worry about what the answers might mean for your husband- HIS actions are on trial and if the truth is that he committed a domestic assault, then that should be addressed.

The subpoena is legally binding, which means you do have to show up if there is infact one in place, but you do not have to testify, Because of spousal privillage. You cant be made to testify against him.

Miss k, that is not accurate- Spousal privilege covers private communications between a husband and wife but does not (in most jurisdictions) excuse a spouse from testifying about events witnessed or, as in this case, the other spouse's actions in a domestic dispute.


For example; If my husband came home tomorrow and confided in me that he'd committed a crime, no court can force me to divulge the content of that conversation (unless there was a third party present when he spoke, which also nullifies privilege in most circumstances) but if I were to WITNESS his illegal acts, spousal privilege would not protect him from my being forced to testify as to what I saw.

Actually, spousal privilege has been modified a great deal by most states. And is completely out in domestic violence.

The subpoena is legally binding, which means you do have to show up if there is infact one in place, but you do not have to testify, Because of spousal privilege. You cant be made to testify against him.

Oh I am sorry maybe I misunderstood what I read, I tried to copy and paste but it wasnt allowed, I think every state is different. In my state the only way is not applicable is in Child Abuse cases. I would suggest google your state along with marital/spousal privilage.

I also read something about you fiiling the report and if you signed it that legally binds you to testify against whom you brought charges to.


"Some states are very proactive in the prosecution of domestic violence cases particularly when the evidence is strong and police-based reporting exists. There are states, however, that have a law known as Spousal or Marital Privilege, in which a legally married victim who is abused by a spouse has a legal option to choose not to testify against the spousal abuser. Consequently, the case is dropped. In jurisdictions where this law exists, the number of times this option can be used varies. For example, in Washington, D.C., the privilege can be exercised without limitation, whereas in the state of Maryland the option can be used only once. " www ****** com
Moderators note- The website has been redacted per PTO policy

I found lot of things. I am not saying you shouldnt testify against your husband or you should. I can understand how it could be really hard. My prayers are with you. Hopefully you find the answers you are looking for, and I hope I didnt confuse anyone, I just googled it and read :)

§ 1219. Imprisonment for omission to perform act; Refusal of victim to testify concerning sexual assault or domestic violence



(a) Except as provided in subdivisions (b) and (c), when the contempt consists of the omission to perform an act which is yet in the power of the person to perform, he or she may be imprisoned until he or she has performed it, and in that case the act shall be specified in the warrant of commitment.

(b) Notwithstanding any other law, no court may imprison or otherwise confine or place in custody the victim of a sexual assault or domestic violence crime for contempt when the contempt consists of refusing to testify concerning that sexual assault or domestic violence crime.

Cal. Civ. Proc. Code 1219

(c) As used in this section, the following terms have the following meanings:

(1) "Sexual assault" means any act made punishable by Section 261, 262, 264.1, 285, 286, 288, 288a, or 289 of the Penal Code.

(2) "Domestic violence" means "domestic violence" as defined in Section 6211 of the Family Code.
2008 Amendment:

(1) Added "or domestic violence crime" both times it appears in subd (b); (2) deleted former subd (c) which read: "(c) In a [Ligature fi]nding of contempt for a victim of domestic violence who refuses to testify, the court shall not incarcerate the victim, but may require the victim to attend up to 72 hours of a domestic violence program for victims or require the victim to perform up to 72 hours of appropriate community service, provided that in a subsequent [Ligature fi]nding of contempt for refusing to testify arising out of the same case, the court shall have the option of incarceration pursuant to subdivision (a)."

I got served over the phone. So it was kinda like a request but there was no paper in my hand. But it's still legally binding.