La. R.S. » RS
Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 15:455 (2026)

Each coconspirator is deemed to assent to or to commend whatever is said or done in furtherance of the common enterprise, and it is therefore of no moment that such act was done or such declaration was made out of the presence of the conspirator sought to be bound thereby, or whether the conspirator doing such act or making such declaration be or be not on trial with his codefendant.  Such evidence is controlled by the provisions of the Louisiana Code of Evidence.  

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§455.  Effect of declarations and acts of coconspirators

Each coconspirator is deemed to assent to or to commend whatever is said or done in furtherance of the common enterprise, and it is therefore of no moment that such act was done or such declaration was made out of the presence of the conspirator sought to be bound thereby, or whether the conspirator doing such act or making such declaration be or be not on trial with his codefendant.  Such evidence is controlled by the provisions of the Louisiana Code of Evidence.  

Amended by Acts 1988, No. 515, §5, eff. Jan. 1, 1989.  

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 69 cases, 1959–2014 · leading case: State v. Kaufman, 331 So. 2d 16 (La. 1976).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Kaufman, 331 So. 2d 16 (La. 1976). · cites it 13× “R.S. 15:455 which provides as follows: Each coconspirator is deemed to assent to or to commend whatever is said or done in furtherance of the common enterprise, and it is therefore of no moment that such act was done or such declaration was made out of the presence of the…”
State v. Johnson, 438 So. 2d 1091 (La. 1983). · cites it 5× “R.S. 15:455, the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule.”
State v. Brown, 326 So. 2d 839 (La. 1976). · cites it 13× “R.S. 15:455 allows proof by the State of a conspiracy in order to take advantage of the relaxed evidence rules established by that provision.”
State v. Clark, 387 So. 2d 1124 (La. 1980). · cites it 4× “R.S. 15:455, which provides: Each coconspirator is deemed to assent to or to commend whatever is said or done in furtherance of the common enterprise, and it is therefore of no moment that such act was done or such declaration was made out of the presence of the conspirator…”
State v. Bennett, 454 So. 2d 1165 (La. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 4× “R.S. 15:455) with Bell in the commission of the armed robbery, he was responsible for Bell's acts of killing Ritchie and Robique during the perpetration of the robbery and is guilty of the second degree murders of those men.”
State v. Sheppard, 350 So. 2d 615 (La. 1977). · cites it 2× “R.S. 15:455 and La.R.S. 14:23-26 as well as certain passages contained in Corpus Juris Secundum relative to principals and co-conspirators.”
State v. Boyd, 359 So. 2d 931 (La. 1978). · cites it 2× “R.S. 15:455. The conversation overheard by Ferrier did not involve only defendant's co-indictees; defendant was an active participant in the conversation, according to Ferrier.”
State v. Ester, 458 So. 2d 1357 (La. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 6× “She has abandoned two and combines the remaining assignments into three arguments.”
State v. Ellis, 657 So. 2d 341 (La. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 3× “A hearing was held at which the state attempted to present a prima facie case of conspiracy pursuant to the old version of LSA-R.S. 15:455. [7] The only evidence the state offered at this hearing was the testimony of two police officers as to the contents of the defendants'…”
State v. Skinner, 204 So. 2d 370 (La. 1967). · cites it 5× “clearly distinguishable from the instant matter wherein proof of an agreement, or conspiracy, to possess or sell narcotics was not an essential, substantive, element of the crime, it being necessary only that the state show that each aided or abetted in the commission of the…”
State v. Brown, 398 So. 2d 1381 (La. 1981). · cites it 2× “LSA-R.S. 15:455. ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR # 1 The State during their interrogation of Jim Churchman, a criminalist with the Louisiana State Police, asked Mr.”
State v. Williams, 385 So. 2d 214 (La. 1980). · cites it 3× “The so-called coconspirator exception to the rule of exclusion of hearsay testimony is provided for in R.S. 15:455. [2] The effect of that statute is to allow the introduction of statements made out of court by a coconspirator of the defendant, if the statements *220 were made…”
Show all 69 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.