Also known as: co-conspirator exemption · coconspirator exception · co-conspirator exception · hearsay exception · conspiracy hearsay rule
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A hearsay exclusion that treats a statement by a party's coconspirator as the party's own admission. The statement must have been made during the conspiracy and in furtherance of its objectives.
Clifford Cox faces trial on conspiracy charges after federal agents arrest several associates. The government offers a recorded statement by Cody Callahan made to recruit new members into the scheme. The court admits the statement under the coconspirator exemption after finding it was made during and in furtherance of the conspiracy.
Charlotte Chung is prosecuted for a drug conspiracy. The government seeks to introduce a statement by Cade Carpenter that detailed how the group would launder proceeds. The court admits the statement under the coconspirator exemption because it was made while the conspiracy operated and advanced its goals.
Connor Clark stands trial for a fraud conspiracy. A statement by Christian Coleman describing the group's plan to submit false invoices is offered. The court admits the statement under the coconspirator exemption after confirming it was made during and in furtherance of the conspiracy.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Crown Pharmaceuticals faces liability when a former employee offers statements by other executives planning to conceal test results. The court determines by a preponderance of the evidence that a conspiracy existed and that the statements furthered it. The statements are admitted against the company under the coconspirator exemption.
Cypress Technologies is sued after an internal email chain reveals executives coordinating to mislead investors. One executive's message implicates the group in the scheme. The court admits the message under the coconspirator exemption, treating it as a vicarious admission based on the agency theory of joint criminal endeavor.
Cardinal Insurance defends a bad-faith claim when an adjuster's notes recount a meeting among claims managers agreeing to deny valid policies. The court admits only the portions of the notes that directly implicate the declarant in the joint plan under the coconspirator exemption and excludes collateral accusations of others.
The declarant's statement must be intended to further the objectives of the conspiracy. The statement must be made while the conspiracy is in operation. The declarant and the party against whom the statement is offered must in fact be members of the same conspiracy.
Supporting sources
No. The exemption rests on an agency rationale that treats the statement as a vicarious admission by the party. It is not based primarily on particular guarantees of trustworthiness that would ensure the truthfulness of the admitted statement.
Supporting sources
Yes. Under Rule 104(a) the judge is not bound by the usual exclusionary rules when determining preliminary questions of admissibility and may consider hearsay for what it is worth in deciding whether the requirements of the exemption are satisfied.
Supporting sources
Yes. Even coconspirators' statements made before the new member joined the conspiracy are admissible against that person. The rationale is that the new member subscribed to both the conspiracy's potential for gain and its preexisting risks.
Supporting sources
…statement was inadmissible under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment, it was admissible under a “firmly rooted” hearsay exception for statements against penal interest and that admitting it did not violate the Constitution. We granted certiorari to determine whether the State’s use of Sylvia’s statement violated the…