Supreme Court of South Carolina

The State, Respondent v. Robert Anders, Petitioner

July 20, 1998331 S.C. 474

Summary

The court reversed the Court of Appeals because the codefendant's post-crime admission neither furthered the conspiracy nor qualified as a statement against penal interest when the declarant was available and testified. The court did not reach the Confrontation Clause issue because the statement was inadmissible against Anders on evidentiary grounds.

Holding

  • Coconspirator exception to the hearsay rule. Simmons's admission was not admissible against Anders under the coconspirator exception because the admission did not further the conspiracy.
  • Statement against penal interest and party admission theories. The admission was not admissible against Anders as a statement against penal interest because Simmons was available and testified, and it was not admissible as Anders's own admission because it was Simmons's statement rather than Anders's.

Docket 24806

Cited authorities

  • Rule 801(d)(2)(E)
  • Rule 804(b)(3)
  • Rule 801(d)(2)

Cited by

Read full opinionPDF