STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. ACELA E. REGALADAÂ (11-07-0776, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-0071-15T2

Defendant Acela Regalada owned/operated a massage parlor in Elizabeth; undercover police made controlled buys at the premises in March and April 2011.
During the March buy, defendant greeted the officer, told other women to clean rooms, explained massage pricing and that girls accepted tips for "additional service," and handled a $60 payment in an envelope; an employee (N.R.) offered explicit sex-for-money prices in a back room.
During the April buy, an employee (L.P.) stated explicit sexual services and prices; similar indicia were found on a later search (index cards with male names, condoms, cash envelope, lotions, cleaning supplies), though some items were destroyed before trial.
Independent evidence tied the operation to defendant: utilities in her name, a cable work order signed by her, massage certificates in her name, employee work schedule, lack of equipment for other spa services, and employees who took direction from her.
Defendant was indicted and convicted by a jury of third-degree promoting prostitution (N.J.S.A. 2C:34-1(b)(2)) and sentenced to three years' probation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of co-conspirator hearsay under N.J.R.E. 803(b)(5)	Statements by N.R. and L.P. were admissible because they were made in furtherance of a prostitution conspiracy and independent evidence corroborated the conspiracy and defendant's role.	Admission was improper because the State lacked sufficient independent corroboration of a conspiracy and defendant's participation; hearsay should be barred.	Court affirmed: independent, non-hearsay evidence (defendant's statements, utilities, work cards, schedule, condoms, cash, employee conduct) sufficiently corroborated a conspiracy, so co-conspirator statements were admissible.

State v. Harris, 209 N.J. 431 (2012) (evidentiary rulings reviewed for abuse of discretion)
State v. Lykes, 192 N.J. 519 (2007) (abuse-of-discretion standard and manifest denial of justice test)
Verdicchio v. Ricca, 179 N.J. 1 (2004) (context for abuse-of-discretion standard)
State v. Phelps, 96 N.J. 500 (1984) (standards for admitting co-conspirator statements and required independent corroboration)
State v. Cagno, 211 N.J. 488 (2012) (elements for N.J.R.E. 803(b)(5) admissibility)
State v. Taccetta, 301 N.J. Super. 227 (App. Div. 1997) (discussing independent-evidence requirement for co-conspirator statements)