Are statements made by a witness considered hearsay?

Respondent maintains that the statements were admissible either under the coconspirator statement exception to the hearsay rule set forth in Evidence Code section 1223, or because they were not offered for the truth of the matter stated and therefore are not hearsay. Section 1223 provides: "Evidence of a statement offered against a party is not made inadmissible by the hearsay rule if: [p] (a) The statement was made by the declarant while participating in a conspiracy to commit a crime or civil wrong and in furtherance of the objective of that conspiracy; [p] (b) The statement was made prior to or during the time that the party was participating in that conspiracy; and [p] (c) The evidence is offered either after admission of evidence sufficient to sustain a finding of the facts specified in subdivisions (a) and (b) or, in the court's discretion as to the order of proof, subject to the admission of such evidence." A conspiracy is shown by "evidence of an agreement between two or more persons with the specific intent to agree to commit a public offense and with the further specific intent to commit such offense, which agreement is followed by an overt act committed by one or more of the parties for the purpose of furthering the object of the [34 Cal.App.4th 626] agreement." (People v. Superior Court (Quinteros) (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th 12, 20, 16 Cal.Rptr.2d 462.)