co-conspirator exception in New Jersey

17 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2024 5 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New Jersey courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (12)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Savagegreen nj · 2002 · cited in 9 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2017–2024 2 sentences 2024A hearsay statement is admissible under the co-conspirator exception if the following conditions are met: "'(1) the statement must have been made in furtherance of the conspiracy; (2) the statement must have been made during the course of the conspiracy; and (3) there must be "evidence, independent of the hearsay, of the existence of the conspiracy and A-2695-21 17 defendant's relationship to it."'" Ibid. (quoting State v. Savage, 172 N.J. 374, 402 (2002)). 2022A hearsay statement is admissible under the co-conspirator exception if the following conditions are met: "(1) the statement must have been made i n furtherance of the conspiracy; (2) the statement must have been made during the course of the conspiracy; and (3) there must be 'evidence, independent of the hearsay, of the existence of the conspiracy and defendant's relationship to it.'" Savage, 172 N.J. at 402 (quoting Phelps, 96 N.J. at 509–10).	5	9
State v. Harrisgreen njsuperctappdiv · 1997 · cited in 4 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2019–2022 2 sentences 2022A-1068-18 44 Under this exception, "[w]here two or more persons are alleged to have conspired to commit a crime, any statement made by one during the course of and in furtherance of the conspiracy is admissible in evidence against any other member of the conspiracy." State v. Harris, 298 N.J. 2022See Harris, 298 N.J.	4	4
State v. Phelpsgreen nj · 1984 · cited in 9 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1990–2023 2 sentences 2022"The co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule, embodied in N.J.R.E. 803(b)(5), provides that statements made 'at the time the party and the declarant were participating in a plan to commit a crime' and 'made in furtherance of that plan,' are admissible into evidence against another member of the conspiracy." Ibid. (quoting N.J.R.E. 803(b)(5)). 2022A hearsay statement is admissible under the co-conspirator exception if the following conditions are met: "(1) the statement must have been made i n furtherance of the conspiracy; (2) the statement must have been made during the course of the conspiracy; and (3) there must be 'evidence, independent of the hearsay, of the existence of the conspiracy and defendant's relationship to it.'" Savage, 172 N.J. at 402 (quoting Phelps, 96 N.J. at 509–10).	3	9
Bourjaily v. United Statesgreen scotus · 1987 · cited in 4 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1989–2019 2 sentences 2019It is well established that the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule "does not offend the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a defendant's right to confront the witnesses against him[.]" Savage, 172 N.J. at 402 (citing Bourjaily v. United States, 483 U.S. 171, 183-84 (1997)). 2002Bourjaily v. United States, 483 U.S. 171, 183-84 , 107 S.Ct. 2775, 2783 , 97 L.Ed.2d 144, 157-58 (1987); State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 229 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed.2d 231 (1971).	2	4
Mattox v. United Statesgreen · 1895 · cited in 2 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1989–1989 2 sentences 1989Bourjaily v. United States, 483 U.S. 171 , 107 S.Ct. 2775, 2782-2783 , 97 L.Ed. 2d 144 (1987); see also Mattox v. United States, 156 U.S. 237, 243-244 , 15 S.Ct. 337, 340 , 39 L.Ed. 409 (1895) (expressing the view that the introduction of evidence pursuant to the dying declaration exception to the hearsay rule does not violate a criminal defendant's constitutional rights). 1989Bourjaily v. United States, 483 U.S. 171 , 107 S.Ct. 2775, 2782-2783 , 97 L.Ed. 2d 144 (1987); see also Mattox v. United States, 156 U.S. 237, 243-244 , 15 S.Ct. 337, 340 , 39 L.Ed. 409 (1895) (expressing the view that the introduction of evidence pursuant to the dying declaration exception to the hearsay rule does not violate a criminal defendant's constitutional rights).	2	2
State v. Boiardogreen njsuperctappdiv · 1970 · cited in 3 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1997–2017 2 sentences 2017State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J. 2002Bourjaily v. United States, 483 U.S. 171, 183-84 , 107 S.Ct. 2775, 2783 , 97 L.Ed.2d 144, 157-58 (1987); State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 229 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed.2d 231 (1971).	1	3
State v. Jamesgreen njsuperctappdiv · 2002 · cited in 2 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 2 sentences 2022A statement is considered to have been made "in furtherance of the conspiracy" if the statement "serves a 'current purpose such as to promote cohesiveness, provide reassurance to a coconspirator or prompt one not a member of the conspiracy to respond in a way that furthers the goal of the conspiracy.'" State v. James, 346 N.J. 2022A-1068-18 45 A statement is considered to have been made "in furtherance of the conspiracy" if the statement "serves a 'current purpose such as to promote cohesiveness, provide reassurance to a co-conspirator, or prompt one not a member of the conspiracy to respond in a way that furthers the goal of the conspiracy.'" State v. James, 346 N.J.	1	2
State v. Taccettagreen njsuperctappdiv · 1997 · cited in 2 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2019–2021 2 sentences 2021To qualify for admission under the co-conspirator exception, three conditions must be met: "(1) the statement must have been made in furtherance of the conspiracy; (2) the statement must have been made during the course of the conspiracy; and (3) there must be 'evidence, independent of the hearsay, of the existence of the conspiracy and defendant's relationship to it.'" Id. at 402 (quoting State v. Phelps, 96 N.J. 500, 509-10 (1984)). 2019Statements made by a co-conspirator are admissible against all conspiracy members via N.J.R.E. 803(b)(5) if the prosecution establishes: "(1) the statement was 'made in furtherance of the conspiracy'; (2) the statement was 'made during the course of the conspiracy'; and (3) there is 'evidence, independent of the hearsay, of the existence of the conspiracy and [the] defendant's relationship to it.'" State v. Cagno, 211 N.J. 488, 530 (2012) (quoting State v. Taccetta, 301 N.J.	1	2
State v. Sparanogreen njsuperctappdiv · 1991 · cited in 2 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2002–2017 2 sentences 2017State v. Sparano, 249 N.J. 2002State v. Sparano, 249 N.J.Super. 411, 420-21 , 592 A.2d 608 (App.Div.1991).	1	2
State v. Santosgreen nj · 2012 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 1 sentence 2022See R. 2:10-5 (allowing appellate court to exercise original jurisdiction to eliminate unnecessary further litigation, but discouraging its use if factfinding is involved); State v. Santos, 210 N.J. 129, 142 (2012) (explaining that Rule 2:10-5 allows an appellate court to exercise original jurisdiction, but A-5586-18 115 by exercising original jurisdiction, the court "would be addressing an evidentiary matter that should be addressed, on the record, in the first instance, by the [trial] court").	1	1
State v. Cagnogreen nj · 2012 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 1 sentence 2019Statements made by a co-conspirator are admissible against all conspiracy members via N.J.R.E. 803(b)(5) if the prosecution establishes: "(1) the statement was 'made in furtherance of the conspiracy'; (2) the statement was 'made during the course of the conspiracy'; and (3) there is 'evidence, independent of the hearsay, of the existence of the conspiracy and [the] defendant's relationship to it.'" State v. Cagno, 211 N.J. 488, 530 (2012) (quoting State v. Taccetta, 301 N.J.	1	1
State v. Cherrygreen njsuperctappdiv · 1995 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 1 sentence 2019A "conspiracy continues until the object of the conspiracy is fulfilled [.]" State v. Cherry, 289 N.J.	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (11)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Boiardo green nj · 1970 2 sentences 2002Bourjaily v. United States, 483 U.S. 171, 183-84 , 107 S.Ct. 2775, 2783 , 97 L.Ed.2d 144, 157-58 (1987); State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 229 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed.2d 231 (1971). 1997State v. Varona, 242 N.J.Super. 474, 483 , 577 A.2d 524 (App.Div.) (citing State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 230 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed. 2d 231 (1971)), certif. denied, 122 N.J. 386 , 585 A.2d 389 (1990).	2	1997–2002
State v. Orsi green nj · 1970 2 sentences 2002Bourjaily v. United States, 483 U.S. 171, 183-84 , 107 S.Ct. 2775, 2783 , 97 L.Ed.2d 144, 157-58 (1987); State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 229 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed.2d 231 (1971). 1997State v. Varona, 242 N.J.Super. 474, 483 , 577 A.2d 524 (App.Div.) (citing State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 230 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed. 2d 231 (1971)), certif. denied, 122 N.J. 386 , 585 A.2d 389 (1990).	2	1997–2002
Hawaii v. Standard Oil Co. green scotus · 1971 2 sentences 2002Bourjaily v. United States, 483 U.S. 171, 183-84 , 107 S.Ct. 2775, 2783 , 97 L.Ed.2d 144, 157-58 (1987); State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 229 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed.2d 231 (1971). 1997State v. Varona, 242 N.J.Super. 474, 483 , 577 A.2d 524 (App.Div.) (citing State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 230 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed. 2d 231 (1971)), certif. denied, 122 N.J. 386 , 585 A.2d 389 (1990).	2	1997–2002
Guzick v. Drebus green scotus · 1971 2 sentences 2002Bourjaily v. United States, 483 U.S. 171, 183-84 , 107 S.Ct. 2775, 2783 , 97 L.Ed.2d 144, 157-58 (1987); State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 229 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed.2d 231 (1971). 1997State v. Varona, 242 N.J.Super. 474, 483 , 577 A.2d 524 (App.Div.) (citing State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 230 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed. 2d 231 (1971)), certif. denied, 122 N.J. 386 , 585 A.2d 389 (1990).	2	1997–2002
Ohio v. Roberts red scotus · 1980 2 sentences 1989Thus, in Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56, 66 , 100 S.Ct. 2531 , 65 L.Ed. 2d 597 (1980), the Court held that the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment is not violated by the admission of hearsay statements "where the evidence falls within a firmly rooted hearsay exception." Applying this principle, the Court has held that the Confrontation Clause is not violated by the admission of evidence pursuant to the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule. 1989Thus, in Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56, 66 , 100 S.Ct. 2531 , 65 L.Ed. 2d 597 (1980), the Court held that the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment is not violated by the admission of hearsay statements "where the evidence falls within a firmly rooted hearsay exception." Applying this principle, the Court has held that the Confrontation Clause is not violated by the admission of evidence pursuant to the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule.	2	1989–1989
State v. Federico green nj · 1986 2 sentences 2001Although we find that Perez should not have been permitted to testify that Figueroa told her defendant was involved in the robbery where she was injured, we must determine whether the admission of that hearsay testimony was "harmless error in view of the other similar proofs before the jury." State v. Federico, 198 N.J.Super. 120, 131 , 486 A. 2d 882 (App.Div.1984), aff'd, 103 N.J. 169 , 510 A. 2d 1147 (1986). 2001Although we find that Perez should not have been permitted to testify that Figueroa told her defendant was involved in the robbery where she was injured, we must determine whether the admission of that hearsay testimony was "harmless error in view of the other similar proofs before the jury." State v. Federico, 198 N.J.Super. 120, 131 , 486 A. 2d 882 (App.Div.1984), aff'd, 103 N.J. 169 , 510 A. 2d 1147 (1986).	1	2001–2001
State v. Federico green njsuperctappdiv · 1984 2 sentences 2001Although we find that Perez should not have been permitted to testify that Figueroa told her defendant was involved in the robbery where she was injured, we must determine whether the admission of that hearsay testimony was "harmless error in view of the other similar proofs before the jury." State v. Federico, 198 N.J.Super. 120, 131 , 486 A. 2d 882 (App.Div.1984), aff'd, 103 N.J. 169 , 510 A. 2d 1147 (1986). 2001Although we find that Perez should not have been permitted to testify that Figueroa told her defendant was involved in the robbery where she was injured, we must determine whether the admission of that hearsay testimony was "harmless error in view of the other similar proofs before the jury." State v. Federico, 198 N.J.Super. 120, 131 , 486 A. 2d 882 (App.Div.1984), aff'd, 103 N.J. 169 , 510 A. 2d 1147 (1986).	1	2001–2001
Crowe v. M & M/MARS AND SPARTAN DESIGN INCORPORATED green nj · 1990 1 sentence 1997State v. Varona, 242 N.J.Super. 474, 483 , 577 A.2d 524 (App.Div.) (citing State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 230 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed. 2d 231 (1971)), certif. denied, 122 N.J. 386 , 585 A.2d 389 (1990).	1	1997–1997
State v. Varona green nj · 1990 1 sentence 1997State v. Varona, 242 N.J.Super. 474, 483 , 577 A.2d 524 (App.Div.) (citing State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 230 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed. 2d 231 (1971)), certif. denied, 122 N.J. 386 , 585 A.2d 389 (1990).	1	1997–1997
State v. Bankston green nj · 1973 2 sentences 1997On appeal, defendant argues: (1) the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence, (2) the State failed to prove the authenticity of a tape recorded conversation allegedly engaged in by the co-conspirators, (3) the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule was applied improperly, (4) the testimony of the investigating police officer violated State v. Bankston, 63 N.J. 263 , 307 A.2d 65 (1973), and (5) the cumulative effect of these errors was to deny defendant a fair trial. 1997On appeal, defendant argues: (1) the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence, (2) the State failed to prove the authenticity of a tape recorded conversation allegedly engaged in by the co-conspirators, (3) the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule was applied improperly, (4) the testimony of the investigating police officer violated State v. Bankston, 63 N.J. 263 , 307 A.2d 65 (1973), and (5) the cumulative effect of these errors was to deny defendant a fair trial.	1	1997–1997
State v. Varona green njsuperctappdiv · 1990 2 sentences 1997State v. Varona, 242 N.J.Super. 474, 483 , 577 A.2d 524 (App.Div.) (citing State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 230 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed. 2d 231 (1971)), certif. denied, 122 N.J. 386 , 585 A.2d 389 (1990). 1997State v. Varona, 242 N.J.Super. 474, 483 , 577 A.2d 524 (App.Div.) (citing State v. Boiardo, 111 N.J.Super. 219, 230 , 268 A.2d 55 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 57 N.J. 130 , 270 A.2d 33 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 948 , 91 S.Ct. 931 , 28 L.Ed. 2d 231 (1971)), certif. denied, 122 N.J. 386 , 585 A.2d 389 (1990).	1	1997–1997

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:43-7.2 (6) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:44-1 (6) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:5-2 (6) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:11-3 (5) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:39-4 (5) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:15-1 (4) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:1-8 (3) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:28-5 (3) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:29-3 (3) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:35-5 (3) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:39-5 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

PA 62 (1972–2025) GA 40 (1979–2022) TX 40 (1978–2024) IL 35 (1977–2020) MO 21 (1977–2024) NJ 17 (1989–2024) TN 13 (1981–2017) NC 11 (1980–2022) OH 11 (1980–2023) AK 8 (1977–1992) MD 8 (1981–2012) VA 6 (1983–2021) CO 6 (1977–1998) ID 5 (1994–2008) FL 5 (1976–2001) CA 4 (2002–2022) IN 4 (1988–1999) DC 4 (1986–2009) NY 4 (1991–2012) AZ 3 (1975–2018) SC 3 (1997–2008) MN 3 (1990–2012) OR 3 (1982–1996) HI 3 (1981–1999) IA 3 (1976–2024) KY 3 (2006–2025) WI 3 (1981–2007) NV 2 (1992–1996) KS 2 (1978–1995) SD 2 (1984–1988) AL 2 (1994–1996) NM 2 (1981–1996) NH 2 (1981–1991) OK 2 (1984–2004) LA 2 (1987–2023) WY 2 (1977–1987) MI 2 (1976–2006)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check