Also known as: in furtherance of a conspiracy · acts in furtherance of the conspiracy · furtherance of conspiracy
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A condition that a statement or act must satisfy before it can be attributed to all members of a conspiracy. The statement or act must advance the goals of the conspiracy rather than merely describe past events or serve as casual remarks.
Ilana Isaacs and Isaiah Ishikawa agreed to conceal evidence of illegal pesticide use on a farm. While actively disposing of barrels at night, Isaiah texted a coworker about the plan to avoid detection. At trial the court admitted the text against Ilana because the message coordinated the concealment effort during the ongoing scheme.
After the transportation conspiracy ended, one participant told a third party about hiding proceeds to avoid punishment. The court refused to admit the statement against the other conspirator because the remark furthered only an uncharged cover-up effort rather than the original charged conspiracy.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Isaac Irving and Ian Iverson conspired to evade taxes. While the conspiracy continued, Ian committed a false filing that advanced the tax-evasion objective. The court held Isaac liable for the filing because it occurred in furtherance of their ongoing agreement.
After arrest, one suspect made a statement implicating another in a narcotics conspiracy. The court excluded the statement against the codefendant because it was not made during and in furtherance of the conspiracy but rather after the scheme had ended.
Conversations among alleged conspirators were recorded on White House tapes. The court examined whether each declaration advanced the charged offenses before deciding admissibility against all participants, requiring independent evidence of the conspiracy plus a showing that the words furthered its aims.
A defendant delivered a speech urging others to overthrow the government. The court held the remarks did not qualify as statements in furtherance of any charged conspiracy because they amounted to abstract advocacy rather than steps advancing a specific agreement.
The proponent must establish by a preponderance that a conspiracy existed, that the declarant and the party against whom the statement is offered participated in it, and that the statement was made during and in furtherance of the conspiracy.
Supporting sources
No. Courts require the statement to advance the objectives of the charged conspiracy itself. A remark aimed solely at avoiding detection after the original goals are achieved does not satisfy the requirement.
Supporting sources
Yes. Statements that induce continued participation, allay fears, or update members on ongoing activities advance the conspiracy and therefore meet the standard.
Supporting sources
No. Unavailability is not a prerequisite for admission of statements that satisfy the coconspirator rule.
Supporting sources
…a coconspirator may be admissible against others upon independent evidence of a conspiracy and a showing the declarations were in furtherance of the conspiracy. Recorded conversations may additionally be admissible for impeachment of witnesses who testify. Given the potential evidentiary uses of the material and the time required for analysis and…