In State v. Featherson, 145 N.C. App. 134, 548 S.E.2d 828 (2001), the defendant, an employee of the restaurant that was robbed, assisted the robbers in gaining access to the restaurant and was bound loosely to the victim with duct tape so as to the give the false appearance that she was not involved in the robbery. See Featherson, 145 N.C. App. at 139, 548 S.E.2d at 832. The Court found that the victim "was already in the same room as the robbers when she was bound to defendant," and that she "was exposed to no 'greater danger than that inherent in the armed robbery itself.'" Id. at 140, 548 S.E.2d at 832 (quoting State v. Irwin, 304 N.C. 93, 103, 282 S.E.2d 439, 446 (1981)). In State v. Featherson, 145 N.C. App. 134, 548 S.E.2d 828 (2001), the defendant's co-defendants had made statements to police following their arrest, implicating the defendant in the crimes. Id. at 137, 548 S.E.2d at 830. However, their testimony at trial "exonerated the defendant from any participation in the crimes charged." Id. Our Court recognized that the pre-trial statements of the defendant's co-defendants were admissible to impeach their trial testimony. Id. However, our Court also held that "statements made by the defendant's codefendants were also properly admitted as substantive evidence." Id. at 137, 548 S.E.2d at 831. Specifically, one of the co-defendants testified on direct, without objection, as to what he had told police regarding the defendant's involvement. Id. Moreover, after the defendant objected to the admission of that co-defendant's written statement, "the State then asked the co-defendant what he told the Detective, and no timely objection was made." Id. Therefore, the defendant waived his challenge to the admission of the written statement. Id. Our Court also emphasized that the challenged evidence "was admitted without any limitation." Id. at 138, 548 S.E.2d at 831. Furthermore, the defendant elicited the pre-trial statement of the other co-defendant on cross-examination of an investigator, and therefore waived his objection to that testimony. Id. As to the sufficiency of the evidence, our Court in Featherson held: The trial court properly denied the defendant's motion to dismiss as to those charges. The alleged hearsay evidence was either properly admitted, or admitted without objection. This evidence includes statements by codefendants which implicate the defendant in the crimes. This evidence, standing alone, constitutes sufficient evidence to deny the defendant's motion to dismiss. Id. at 139, 548 S.E.2d at 831-32.