In deciding whether the People have proved that (the defendant[s]/Defendant[s] _________________<insert name[s] of defendant[s] ifcodefendant trial and this instruction does not apply to all defendants;see Bench Notes>) committed [any of] the crime[s] charged, you may not consider any statement made out of court by ____________<insert name[s] of coconspirator[s]> unless the People have provedby a preponderance of the evidence that:

1.    Some evidence other than the statement itself establishes that a conspiracy to commit a crime existed when the statement was made;

2.    ___________ <insert name[s] of coconspirator[s]> (was/
were) members of and participating in the conspiracy when (he/she/they) made the statement;

3.    ____________ <insert name[s] of coconspirator[s]> made the
statement in order to further the goal of the conspiracy;

AND

4.    The statement was made before or during the time that (the defendant[s]/Defendant[s]            <insert name[s]
of defendant[s] if codefendant trial and this instruction does not apply to all defendants>) (was/were) participating in the conspiracy.

A statement means an oral or written expression, or nonverbal conduct intended to be a substitute for an oral or written expression.

Proof by a preponderance of the evidence is a different standard of proof than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. A fact is proved by a preponderance of the evidence if you conclude that it is more likely than not that the fact is true.

[You may not consider statements made by a person who was not a member of the conspiracy even if the statements helped accomplish the goal of the conspiracy.]