State v. Wilkins

Summary

The court affirmed the trial court’s partial grant of Wilkins’ motion in limine, holding that the challenged statements by his co-defendant were not shown to have been made in furtherance of the conspiracy. Although statements made during a conspiracy’s concealment phase may qualify, the statements here were primarily retrospective, disclosed the criminal scheme, or attempted to shift blame rather than advance the conspiracy. The court also held that the State’s prior severance argument did not preserve or waive the distinct hearsay issue because the severance dispute concerned a separate confrontation-clause question.