Defendant Macaulay's Motion in Limine to Preclude Testimony Protected by the Marital Communication Privilege — United States v. Ryan Macaulay (Dkt. 107)

Summary

Defendant Macaulay's Motion in Limine to Preclude Testimony Protected by the Marital Communication Privilege at Trial, Case No. 24-cr-180-PTG-2, Document 107, filed April 9, 2025, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Ryan Macaulay, by and through undersigned counsel, asks the Court to issue an Order in Limine precluding Andrea Macaulay and the government from presenting testimony within the scope of his marital communications privilege. The motion states that he was charged on August 15, 2024 by Indictment and Superseding Indictment and that his jury trial is set for April 22, 2025. It states that Andrea Macaulay is Mr. Macaulay's wife and is not an alleged co-conspirator or co-defendant.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Cite this document

“Defendant Macaulay's Motion in Limine to Preclude Testimony Protected by the Marital Communication Privilege — United States v. Ryan Macaulay (Dkt. 107).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/gov-uscourts-vaed-558615-107-0-3fe7d1154f/, SHA-256 8176ba80e61796a5faa04505d474f82a983980eda0a274c647778c18bd1f360b.

Full text

Case 1:24-cr-00180-PTG Document 107 Filed 04/09/25 Page 1 of 3 PageID# 629

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

)
UNITED STATES )
)
v. )
) Case No. 24-cr-180-PTG-2
RYAN MACAULAY )
Defendant )
____________________________________)

DEFENDANT MACAULAY’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY
PROTECTED BY THE MARITAL COMMUNICATION PRIVILEGE AT TRIAL

The defendant, Ryan Macaulay, by and through undersigned counsel, respectfully

requests this Court issue an Order in Limine to preclude Andrea Macaulay and the government

from presenting any testimony that falls within the scope of Mr. Macaulay’s marital

communications privilege.

In support of this Motion, counsel states the following:

Introduction

On August 15, 2024, Mr. Macaulay was charged by Indictment and Superseding

Indictment with one count of Conspiracy to Commit Bank Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §

1349, one count of Bank Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § § 1344 and 2, one count of

Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h), and one count of

Money Laundering – Unlawful Monetary Transactions, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § § 1957 and 2.

See Dkt. No. 1 and 38. Mr. Macaulay’s jury trial is now set for April 22, 2025. See Dkt. No. 61.

Law and Argument

The Supreme Court has established that marriage confers two distinct evidentiary

privileges: 1) the spousal testimonial privilege, and 2) the marital communications privilege. The

spousal testimonial privilege grants the witness-spouse the right to refuse to testify against the

1
Case 1:24-cr-00180-PTG Document 107 Filed 04/09/25 Page 2 of 3 PageID# 630

other. United States v. Trammell, 445 U.S. 40, 51 (1980). In contrast, the marital

communications privilege, which resides in the defendant-spouse, allows them to prevent

disclosure of confidential communications shared with their spouse. United States v. Parker, 834

F.2d 408, 410-11 (4th Cir. 1987).

The marital communications privilege protects information that is privately disclosed

between spouses in the confidence of the marital relationship as privileged. See United States v.

Parker, 834 F.2d 408, 411 (4th Cir. 1987). Marital communications are presumptively

confidential. See Parker, 834 F.2d at 411. However, when a third party is present, the

presumption is negated. Pereira v. United States, 347 U.S. 1, 6 (1954). The privilege, held by the

defendant spouse, allows them to prevent disclosure of confidential communications shared with

their spouse. United States v. Acker, 52 F.3d 509, 514 (4th Cir. 1995). Importantly, the privilege

only covers verbal communications, not actions. Pereira, 347 U.S. at 6. If the conduct was not

intended to convey a confidential message, it is not protected by the privilege. See, e.g., United

States v. Estes, 793 F.2d 467. Finally, the privilege does not apply if the communication involves

the commission of a crime in which both spouses are involved. Id.: United States v. Broome, 732

F.2d 353, 365 (4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 (1984).

Andrea Macaulay is Mr. Macaulay’s wife and is not an alleged co-conspirator or co-

defendant in this matter. Therefore, Mr. Macaulay respectfully asserts his marital

communications privilege, and requests that this Court instruct the government not to elicit, and

Ms. Macaulay not to testify, as to any information that could fall within the scope of the martial

communications privilege.

2
Case 1:24-cr-00180-PTG Document 107 Filed 04/09/25 Page 3 of 3 PageID# 631

Respectfully submitted,

__________/s/___________________
David Benowitz
VSB # 91194
Rammy G. Barbari
VSB # 88414
Price Benowitz LLP
409 7th Street, NW, Suite 200
Washington, D.C. 20004
Tel: 202-271-5249
Tel: 202-870-0139
Fax: 202-664-1331
david@pricebenowitz.com
rammy@pricebenowitz.com

Counsel for Ryan Macaulay

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 9th day of April, 2025, a true and correct copy of the

foregoing Defendant’s Motion has been served via CM/ECF to all parties in this matter.

__________/s/___________________
David Benowitz

File and source

File: gov.uscourts.vaed.558615.107.0.pdf
Size: 119,215 bytes
SHA-256: 8176ba80e61796a5faa04505d474f82a983980eda0a274c647778c18bd1f360b
Our copy: gov.uscourts.vaed.558615.107.0.pdf
Original: No public link identified.