A statement by a non-conspirator is treated as the statement of a co-conspirator for purposes of the hearsay exemption for statements of co-conspirators if a co-conspirator adopts the statement of the non-conspirator.

Fed. R. Evid. 807(B) (statement admissible under Rule 807 only if "the statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts").The hearsay exception created by Federal Rule of Evidence 807 or a comparable State rule applies only if the the affected statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts.

Cf. Sparks v. Gilley Trucking Co., Inc., 992 F.2d 50, pin? (4th Cir. 1993) (negligence action based on negligent driving of defendant's employee; defense: negligent driving by plaintiff; prior convictions of plaintiff for speeding held inadmissible because negligence...Evidence of a criminal or wrongful act apart from the act that at issue at trial Is not barred by the prohibition against circumstantial use of character if intent, knowledge, mistake, or accident is a legally-material factual issue, the opposing party suggests the non-existence of knowledge or urges mistake or accident as a defense, and evidence of another crime, wrong, or act is offered to prove the knowledge or the absence of mistake or accident by a criminal defendant or other person.

Fed. R. Evid. 807(C) (statement admissible under Rule 807 only if "the general purposes of these rules and the interests of justice will best be served").The hearsay exception created by Federal Rule of Evidence 807 or a parallel State rule applies only if admission of the affected statement in evidence serves the interests of justice and the general purposes of the law of evidence.