# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 4- 21 49

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Cu rti s Ad am s

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Eas te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - St . Lou is

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Jan ua ry

16 , 20 15 Fil ed : Ap ril 24 , 20 15

__ __ __ __ __ __
Befo re WOL LMAN, SMITH, an d S HEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __

SMI TH, Circ ui t J ud ge

.

Cu rti s Ada m s ap pe al s hi s co nv ic ti on fo r be in g a fel on in po ss es si on of a fir earm

. At tri al
, th e di st ric t co ur t gr an te d th e go ve rn m en t's m ot io n in li m in e to ad m it 1

ev id en ce of Ada m s's pr ev io us co nv ic ti on s fo r fir earm of fen se s un de r Ru le 40 4( b) of

The Hon or ab le Cat he rin e D. Perr y , Unit ed St at es D ist ric t Ju dg e fo r th e East ern 1 Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.th e Fed eral Ru le s o f Ev i d e n c e to sh ow th at Ada m s ha d th e req ui red in te nt an d

kn owl ed ge to po ss es s th e fir earm

. Ada m s arg ue s th at th e ev i d e n c e o f th es e pr io r

co nv ic ti on s s ho ul d h av e b een ex cl ud ed . W e aff irm.

I. Bac kg ro un d
On M ay 28 , 20 13 , si x po li ce de te ct iv es ap pr oa ch ed a gr ou p o f in di vi du al s i n Kin lo ck
, Mi ss ou ri, aft er ob se rv i n g w h a t ap pe ared to be ha nd -to -h an d dr ug
tra ns act io ns

. Upo n se ei ng th e de te ct iv es , Ada m s cl ut ch ed hi s wais tb an d an d fle d th e

sc en e th ro ug h a ne arb y ap art m en t co m pl ex

. Fo ur de te ct iv es pu rs ue d. Dete ct iv e Ch ad
Hin ds te st ifi ed th at , whi le in pu rs ui t, he sa w Ada m s br an di sh a se m i-a ut om at ic pi st ol

an d an gl e hi s bo dy to po in t it ba ck ward s at th e de te ct iv es as he fle d. Dete ct iv e Hin ds
si gn al ed to th e ot he r de te ct iv es th at he sa w a fir earm an d or de red Ada m s to dr op th e fir earm . W he n Adam s di d no t co m pl y , Detec ti ve Hin ds fir ed two rou nd s at Adam s. Acco rd in g to se ve ral de te ct iv es , Ada m s th en dr op pe d th e fir earm in t h e g ras s. Dete ct iv e Sean Bec ke r st ay ed wit h th e weap on whi le th e ot he rs co nt in ue d th e pu rs ui t. Th e de te ct iv es ap pr eh en de d Ada m s whe n he tri pp ed in a gr as sy area

. Dete ct iv e Bec ke r an d Dete ct iv e W il li am Bat es tra ns po rte d A da m s to th e ho sp it al to tre at an in jury Ada m s su st ai ne d fro m hi s fal l. Bo th de te ct iv es te st ifi ed th a t w h i l e in th ei r

cu st od y , Adam s m ad e in cri m in at in g s ta te m en ts ab ou t p os se ss in g t he fir earm

.

Ada m s was in di ct ed fo r on e co un t of be in g a fel on in po ss es si on of a fir earm , in v i o l a t io n of 18 U.S.C. § 92 2( g) (1 ). Ada m s pl ead ed no t gu il ty. The go ve rn m en t

m ov ed in li m in e to in tro du ce ev id en ce of Ada m s's pr io r co nv ic ti on s u n d e r Ru le
40 4( b) to pr ov e hi s kn owl ed ge of fir earm s an d hi s in te nt to po ss es s a fir earm

. The se
two pr io r co nv ic ti on s in cl ud ed a 20 08 co nv ic ti on in fed eral co ur t fo r be in g a fel on in

po ss es si on of a fir earm an d a 20 05 st at e-co ur t co nv ic ti o n fo r un la wfu l us e of a
weap on —ca rry in g a co nc eal ed weap on

. In bo th cas es , Ada m s was c o n v i c t e d of

carr y in g se m i-a ut om at ic pi st ol s si m il ar to th e on e po li ce al le ge d he carr ie d on th e da y of hi s arre st

. At th e fin al pr e-t ria l co nf eren ce, th e di st ric t co ur t acce pt ed a st ip ul at io n be twee n t he pa rti es to de la y rul in g o n t he m ot io n u nt il it be cam e rel ev an t at tri al

.

-2

-At the en d of the fir st da y of tri al an d afte r th e juro rs ha d bee n di sm is se d, th e

co ur t rev is it ed th e m ot io n in li m in e. The go ve rn m en t su gg es te d th at th e ti m e was rip e fo r th e co ur t to ru le on th e m ot io n be cau se Ada m s's de fen se el ic it ed te st imo n y th at

q u e s t io ne d whe th er he act ua ll y po ss es se d th e fir earm

. Ada m s's de fen se w a s

es se nt ia ll y

ba se d on a th eo ry

th at th e d et ect iv es pl an te d t he fir earm an d wro ng fu ll y

accu se d Ad am s o f po ss es si ng it

.

The co ur t an d th e go ve rn m en t en ga ge d in an ex te ns iv e ex ch an ge on th e 40 4( b)
fact or s at is su e. The co ur t un de rs to od th e go ve rn m en t's arg um en t fo r us in g th e pr io r

co nv ic ti on s to pr ov e kn owl ed ge : "Th at he k n e w w h a t a fir earm was [ an d] h e kn ew th at wha t he h ad in hi s po ss es si on was in fact a fir earm ." H owe ve r, th e co ur t no te d,
"I un de rs ta nd

. . . in an ot he r ki nd of cas e, 'You kn ew it was crac k co cai ne , no t a pi ece of gr av el

. You kn ew th is was a gu n, no t a to y .' Tha t, I un de rs ta nd kn owl ed ge ." Und er th e Ru le 40 3 st an da rd
, ho wev er, th e co ur t th ou gh t th at us in g th e pr io r co nv ic ti on s ha d

ve ry li tt le pr ob at iv e va lu e be cau se "d o we real ly th i n k t h a t th ere's an y bo dy in th e

wor ld who do es n't kn ow wha t a gu n is ?

. . . [S]o th e fact th at he ha d th is pr ev io us gu n

co nv ic ti on —d oe s th at real ly s ho w t ha t he kn ew wha t a gu n was an y m or e th an an y
ot he r hu m an be in g . . . [? ]"

Th e c o u r t al so qu es ti on ed us e of th e pr io r co nv ic ti on s to pr ov e in te nt un de r 40 4( b) "b ecau se it 's al way s se em ed to m e th at whe n [th e go ve rn m en t is ] sa y in g [p as t fir earm co nv ic ti on s] pr ov e[] in te nt , it 's real ly sa y in g pr op en si ty." Eve n Ada m s's

co un se l, ho wev er, co nc ed ed th at sh e "u nd ers t[o od ] ho w eas il y th es e co nv ic ti on s are ad m it te d i n g un cas es ." The co ur t re fle ct ed up on it s v ie w th at , whi le Eig ht h C irc ui t

pr eced en t su pp or ti ng ad m is si on of su ch ev id en ce is am pl e, th e rat io na le su pp or ti ng it s pr ob at iv e va lu e rem ai ne d un sa ti sf a c t o ry

. Afte r rep eat ed in qu iri es to th e
go ve rn m en t, th e co ur t ack no wled ge d th at th e Eig ht h Ci rcu it ha s "s ai d man y , m an y ti m es it can be us ed to sh ow in te nt

. I'm jus t try in g to as k fo r an ex pl an at io n fo r ho w th at work s."

-3

-Co nc lu di ng th e d is cu ss io n wi th co un se l, t he di st ric t co ur t s ta te d:

If I were writ in g

. . . th e la w,

. . . I wou ld sa y it 's in ad m is si bl e; ho wev er, I am co ns tra in ed by th e Eig ht h Ci rcu it
, an d ev en th ou gh I th in k th at th e da ng er of un fai r p r e

ju di ce ou twei gh s th e pr ob at iv e va lu e, I ha ve be en to ld on nu m ero us oc cas io ns th at I'm no t al lo wed to th in k th at , an d so I do n't real ly ha ve a ro le in th is

. The Eig ht h Ci rcu it sa y s th at co nv ic ti on s of a si m il ar na tu re are ad m is si bl e to sh ow— an d th en th ey li st th e who le th in g, an d no bo dy ev er ex pl a i n s w hy, sh or t of kn owl ed ge , whi ch I do

un de rs ta nd

. I m ean so m et im es if th ere wou ld be m ot iv e o r ab se nc e—we ll
, wha te ve r, bu t I—s o I th in k th at it is ad m i s s i b le un de r 40 4( b)

. It' s a ru l e o f in cl us io n as th e Eig ht h Ci rcu it te ll s us an d ev en th ou gh it says it 's n ot , and so I wil l al lo w i t t o b e ad m it te d b ecau se th e Eig ht h Ci rcu it ha s m ad e it cl e a r t h a t be in g a fel on in po ss es si on of a fir earm or a co nv ic ti on fo r carr y in g a co nc eal ed weap on or un la wfu l us e of a weap on is ad m is si bl e as 40 4( b) ev id en ce in a la te r pr os ecu ti on fo r fel on in po ss es si on of a fir earm , an d th ere are pr ob ab ly a hu nd red Eig ht h Ci rcu it cas es th at sa y th at

. So I wil l ad m it it an d fin d th at it 's ad m is si bl e fo r on e o f th os e p ur

po se s.

The ne xt da y at tri al
, t h e c o ur t tw ic e ga ve th e jury a li m it in g in st ru ct io n th at th ey

co ul d on ly co ns id er Ada m s's pr io r co nv ic ti on s to sh ow hi s kn owl ed ge or in te nt , no t

to sh ow p ro pe ns it y

.

Ada m s's de fen se st rat eg y was to arg ue th at he di d no t p o s se ss th e al le ge d
fir earm at al l, bu t th at la w en fo rcem en t of fic ers pl an te d th e fir earm

. The go ve rn m en t cal le d th e fo ur of

fic ers , so m e of who m were in vo lv ed in th e ch as e an d arre st o f
Ada m s, as wit ne ss es

. The se of fic ers te st ifi ed th at th e y ( 1 ) sa w Ada m s po in ti ng th e
gu n at th em ; (2 ) sa w Ada m s dr op th e f i rear m ; an d (3 ) he ard Ada m s m ak e in cri m in at in g s ta te m en ts ab ou t p os se ss in g t he fir earm

.

Dete ct iv e Hin ds was t he fir st to tes ti fy . De te ct iv e Hin ds lea d t he foo t p ur su it
of Ada m s. He te st ifi ed to be in g "[t ]w en ty to 30 feet " be hi nd Ada m s whi le in pu rs ui t.

-4

-Dete ct iv e Hin ds te st ifi ed th at he sa w "M r. Ada m s'[ s] rig ht ha nd co m e up away fro m

hi s bo dy, ho ld in g a bl ack

. . . pi st ol
, at whi ch ti m e it cam e aro un d an d was po in te d in

ou r di rect io n." Dete ct iv e Hin ds te st ifi ed th at he y el le d "[g ]un, gu n, gu n," un ho ls te red
hi s fir earm , an d fir ed two sh ot s at Ada m s

. A f t e r h i s se co nd sh ot , Dete ct iv e Hin ds

te st ifi ed th at "M r. Ada m s im m ed ia te ly dr op pe d t h e fir earm to

. . . th e gr as s."
Dete ct iv e Hin ds co nt in ue d to pu rs ue Ada m s whi le an ot he r of fic er, Dete ct iv e Bec ke r,
st ay ed be hi nd wit h t he fir earm wher e it lay.

Dete ct iv e Bec k e r t e s t ifi ed ne xt

. Dete ct iv e Bec ke r st at ed th at whi le he was
pu rs in g Ada m s, ro ug hl y "2 0 feet or so " be hi nd hi m (an d be hi nd Dete ct iv e Hin ds ), he
al so sa w Ada m s po in ti ng th e gu n bac k to ward s th e de te ct iv es

. Afte r an ot he r of fic er (Det ect iv e Hin ds ) fir ed two ro un ds at Ada m s, he te st ifi ed th at he sa w Ada m s dr op th e fir earm

. Dete ct iv e Bec ke r st op pe d an d rem ai n e d wit h th e fir earm whi le th e ot he r de te ct iv es pu rs ue d Ada m s. Dete ct iv e Bec ke r al so te sti fi ed that whi le he an d Dete ct iv e Bat es were t ran sp or ti ng Adam s t o t he ho sp it al aft er Adam s's arre st , Ada m s p oi nt ed

to ward s a pa rk ed ve hi cl e th ey were pa ss in g on th e ro a d

. Acco rd in g to Dete ct iv e Bec ke r, Ada m s st at ed th at hi s br ot he r was rece nt ly sh ot at whi le in si de th at pa rti cu la r

ve hi cl e; th e ve hi cl e ha d bu ll et ho le s in it s rear

. Ada m s furt he r st at ed th at he ha d th e fir earm be cau se he was "at te m pt in g to pr ot e c t h i ms el f an d hi s br ot he r." Afte r th is

te st im on y , th e g o v e r nm en t re-i nt ro du ced Exh ib it 2A, whi ch was th e Sp rin gf ie ld
Arm or y 9m m pi st ol th at Ada m s al le ge dl y po ss es se d. Dete ct iv e Bec ke r id en ti fie d th e fir earm as th e on e th at he sa w Ada m s dr op an d th e on e th at he pe rs on al ly st ay ed wit h

un ti l Det ect iv e Cl ay

Peel er o f th e St . Lou is Co un ty Poli ce l at er s ei zed it

.

Dete ct iv e Bat es wa s n ex t to te st ify an d co rro bo rat ed Dete ct iv e Bec ke r's

te st im on y

. Dete ct iv e Bat es te st ifi ed th at he an d Dete ct iv e Bec ke r tra ns po rte d Ada m s
to th e ho sp it al aft er Ada m s's arre st

. Dur in g tra ns it
, Dete ct i v e B e c ke r te st ifi ed th at Ada m s "m en ti on ed he ha d [th e fir earm ] on hi m be cau se hi s br ot he r ha d be en sh ot at earl ie r an d ba si cal ly m or e so fo r pr ot ect io n." Ada m s m ad e th is st at em en t whi le th ey

-5

-were pa ss in g an ol d Ch ev ro le t va n th at hi s br ot he r own ed
, whi ch ha d bu ll et ho le s in

th e rea r of

th e v an

.

Fi na ll y , Dete ct iv e Nich ol as Payne te st ifi ed

. He pu rs ue d Ada m s on a di ffer en t

ro ut e in an at te m

pt to cu t hi m of

f. He te st ifi ed th at aft er he he ard Dete ct iv e Hin ds y el l "[g ]un, " h e h e a r d two gu ns ho ts

. Dete ct iv e Payne st at ed th at "[a ]fter th e sh ot s were fir ed
, I ob se rv ed [Ada m s] dro p t he fir earm , and he st um bl ed a li tt le bi t, and th en he

co nt in ue d ru nn in g." He te st ifi ed th at he m ov ed th e fir earm fro m whe re Ada m s dr op pe d it in or de r to s e c u r e i t

. He di d no t di rect th e ev id en ce te ch ni ci an to ta ke ph ot os of t he gu n wh ere i t was dro pp ed

.

Ada m s's de fen se c o u n s el vi go ro us ly cro ss -ex am in ed th e de te ct iv es

. Sh e
po in te d ou t th at th e po li ce rep or ts di d no t in cl ud e Ada m s's al le ge d co nf es si on ; al so , sh e hi g h l i g ht ed th at th e de te ct iv es di d no t di rect th e ev id en ce te ch ni ci an to ta ke ph ot og rap hs of th e fir earm at th e sc en e. The jury ul ti m at el y fo un d Ada m s gu il ty, an d
th e co ur t l at er s en te nc ed hi m to 12 0 m on th s' i m

pr is on m en t.

II. Dis cu ss io n Ada m s arg ue s on ap pe al th at th e di st ric t co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by
ad m it ti ng hi s pr io r il l e g a l f i rear m s co nv ic ti on s de sp it e co nc lu di ng th at "t he da ng er of un fai r pr ejud ic e o ut weig hs th e p ro ba ti ve va lu e." 2

Ru le 40 4( b) de cl ares in ad m is si bl e " [ e ]v id en ce of a cri m e

. . . to pr ov e a
pe rs on 's c ha ract er i n o rd er t o s ho w th at on a pa rti cu la r oc cas io n th e p ers on act ed in

acco rd an ce wit h th e ch arac te r." Fed

. R. Evi d. 40 4( b) (1 ). "Th is ev id en ce m ay be

W e reco gn iz e th at th e co ur t's la ng ua ge do es no t tra ck Ru le 40 3 ex act ly, whi ch 2 al lo ws a co ur t to "ex cl ud e rel ev an t ev id en ce i f i t s p ro ba ti ve va lu e is su bs ta nt ia ll y

ou twei gh ed by a da ng er of

. . . un fai r pr ejud ic e." Fed

. R. Evi d. 40 3 (em ph as is ad de d)

. The go ve rn m en t co nc ed ed at or al arg um en t, ho wev er, th at th e di st ric t co ur t ne ed no t reci te th e Ru le 40 3 v erb at im in it s fi nd in g.

-6

-ad m is si bl e[, ho wev er,] fo r an o t h er pu rp os e, su ch as pr ov in g m ot iv e, op po rtu ni ty,

in te nt , pr ep arat io n, pl an , kn ow le dg e , id en ti ty, ab se nc e of m is ta ke
, or la ck of
acci de nt ." Id

. a t 40 4( b) (2 ) (em ph as es ad de d)

. "'We rev ie w th e di st ric t co ur t's
ad m is si on of ev id en ce of pa st cri m es un de r [Fed eral Ru le of Evi d e n c e ] 40 4( b) fo r ab us e of di sc ret io n, an d we wil l no t rev ers e un le ss th e ev id en ce cl earl y ha d no be ari ng on th e cas e an d was in tro du ced so le ly to pr ov e th e de fen da nt 's pr op en si ty to

co m m it cri m i n a l act s.'" Uni te d St at es v. Bas se tt , 76 2 F.3 d 68 1, 68 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 14 ) (al te rat io n i n o rig in al ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d S ta te s v. Ba nk s , 70 6 F .3d 90 1, 90 6 (8 th Cir

. 20 13 )), cer t. den ie d
, 13 5 S. Ct

. 88 2 (20 14 ). W e wil l on ly rev ers e a co nv ic ti on if th e

ev id en ti ary erro r is no t ha rm le ss

. Uni te d St at es v. La ng le y , 54 9 F.3 d 72 6, 72 9 (8 th
Ci r. 20 08 ). "An ev id en ti ary erro r is ha rm le ss whe n, aft er rev ie win g th e en ti re reco rd
,

we de te rm in e th at th e su bs ta nt ia l rig ht s of th e de fen da nt were un affe ct ed
, an d th at th e

erro r di d no t in flu en ce or ha d on ly a sl ig ht in flu en ce on th e ve rd ic t." Id

. (q uo ta ti on s

an d c it at io n o m it te d)

.

Ru le 40 4( b) ev id en ce is ad m is si bl e if it is "'(1 ) rel ev an t to a m at eri al is su e; (2 )
si m il ar in ki nd an d no t ov erl y rem ot e in ti m e to th e cri m e ch arg ed ; (3 ) su pp or te d by

su ffi ci en t ev id en ce; an d (4 ) hi gh er in pr ob at iv e va lu e th an pr ejud ic ia l effe ct .'" Uni te d
St at es v. W

al ker
, 47 0 F.3 d 12 71
, 12 74 (8 th C i r

. 2 00 6) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. St ro ng , 41 5 F.3 d 90 2, 90 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 )). Onc e de te rm in ed ad m is si bl e un de r 40 4( b)
, ev id en ce m

us t st il l pa ss th e "s ub st an ti al ly ou twei gh ed " te st of Ru le 40 3. Se e Cl ar k v. Mar ti ne

z , 29 5 F

. 3 d 8 09
, 81 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 02 ) (fi nd in g th at ev id en ce th at

wou ld ot he rwis e be ad m is si bl e un de r Ru le 40 4( b) st il l ha s to m eet th e req ui rem en ts of Ru le 40 3)

.

Ada m s arg ue s on ap pe al th at th e di st ric t co ur t's st at em en ts wit hi n it s Ru le 40 3

an al y si s pr ecl ud es th e ad m is si bi li ty of hi s pr io r co nv ic ti on s. Acco rd in g to Ada m s, th e di st ric t co ur t er red in ad m it ti ng ev id en ce t ha t i t h ad co nc lu de d c arri ed m or e d an ge r of un fai r pr ejud ic e th an pr ob at iv e va lu e. Fu rth ermo re, he arg ue s th at th is erro r was

-7

-no t ha rm le ss be cau se th e un fai r pr ejud ic e se rv ed a s a " l u re to di st ract juro rs " fro m

"d ou bt s i n t he de te ct iv es ' cred ib il it y ."

W e ha ve he ld on m an y oc cas io ns th at pr io r co nv ic ti on s of fir earm of fen se s are ad m is si bl e to pr ov e th at th e de fen da nt ha d th e req ui si te kn owl ed ge an d in t e n t t o
po ss es s a fir earm

. Se e, e.g

. , Uni t e d St at es v. St ro ud
, 67 3 F.3 d 85 4, 86 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ); Uni te d St at es v. Hal k
, 63 4 F.3d 48 2, 48 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) ("[ The de fen da nt ]'s

pr io r fir earm s of

f e n s e s a dd res s th e m at eri al is su e of hi s kn owl ed ge of th e pr es en ce of th e fir earm an d hi s in te nt to po ss es s it ." (ci ta ti on om it te d) ); Uni te d St at es v. Oak s , 60 6 F.3 d 53 0, 53 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) ("[ The de fen da n t ]' s p r io r co nv ic ti on fo r arm ed

ro bb ery ad dr es se s th e m at eri al is su e of hi s kn owl ed ge of th e pr es en ce of th e fir earm

a n d h i s in te nt to po ss es s it ." (ci ta ti on om it te d) ); W al ker
, 47 0 F.3 d 12 71
, 12 74 (8 t h
Ci r. 20 06 ) (s am e).

St ro ud
, fo r ex am

pl e, is qu it e si m il ar to Ada m s' s c a s e

. In St ro ud
, la w

en fo rcem en t of

fic ers he ard two gu ns ho ts an d th en sa w th e de fen da nt ru nn in g aro un d

a co rn er. 67 3 F.3 d at 85 7. The of fic ers sa w th e de fen da nt cl ut ch in g hi s wais tb an d as he wa s ru nn in g. Id

. The de fen da nt at te m pt ed to cl im

b ov er a fen ce, bu t on e of th e
pu rs ui ng of

fic ers was ab le to gr ab th e de fen da nt by th e sh ou ld er an d ke ep hi m fro m
ge tt in g ov er th e fen ce. Id

. at 85 8. The of fic ers sa w th e de fen da nt th ro w wha t ap pe ared

to be a fir earm ov er th e fen ce in a ba ll ed -u p t-s hi rt. Id

. W hi le on e of fic er st ay ed wit h
th e de fen da nt , who ha d be en pl aced un de r arre st , th e ot he r of fic er fo un d th e it em s on th e ot he r si de of th e fen ce, whi ch in cl ud ed a m ag nu m rev ol ve r. Id

. The de fen da nt was

co nv ic te d of

be in g a fel on in po ss es si on of a fir earm , b ut ch al le ng ed th e ad m is si on of hi s pr io r co nv ic ti on of un la wfu ll y po ss es si ng a m ach in e gu n on ap pe al

. Id

. at 85 9.
W e up he ld th e di st ric t co ur t's ad m is si on of th e pr io r co nv ic ti on , fin di ng th at th e pr io r

co nv ic ti on "i s rel ev an t to [t h e de fen da nt ]'s fam il ia rit y wit h an d kn owl ed ge th at he

po ss es se d a fir earm ." Id

. at 8 61

.

-8

-Thu s, un de r th e in it ia l Ru le 40 4( b) an al y si s, ou r pr e c e d en t in di cat es th at

pr ev io us fir earm -rel at e d c r im es can be rel ev an t to pr ov e th at a de fen da nt ha d th e

ne ces sa ry kn owl ed ge th at a fir earm was pr es en t on or ne ar hi s pe rs on an d t h a t a de fen da nt ha d th e in te nt to po ss es s th e fir earm so le ly, joi nt ly, or co ns tru ct iv el y

. The 3
di st ric t co ur t ag reed . Th is cas e, ho wev er, in tro du ces an un us ua l s cen ari o. Her e, th e di st ric t co ur t ag reed th at th e ev id en ce h ad a pe rm it te d u se un de r 40 4( b) (2 ) bu t t he n al so st at ed th at , in he r vi ew, th e pr ob at iv e va lu e of th e ev id en ce was ou twei gh ed by

a da ng er of un fai r pr ejud ic e. Nev ert he le ss , th e co ur t ul ti m at el y ru le d th at th e ev id en ce

was ad m is si bl e de sp it e st at in g m is gi vi ng s ab ou t it s po te nt ia l fo r un fai r pr ejud ic e an d

pe rcei ve d co ns tra in ts of th is ci rcu it 's pr eced en t on th e co ur t's Ru le 40 3 di sc ret io n. The di st ric t co ur t's st at em en ts no twi th st an di ng , ci rcu it pr eced en t co nt ai ns no

res tri ct io n on a di st ric t jud ge 's ab il it y to w e i g h th e fact or s li st ed in Ru le 40 3 an d
ad mi t o r ex cl ud e ev id en ce th at ot he rwis e m eet s th e ad m is si bi li ty req ui rem en ts of
Ru le 40 4( b)

.

Eve n as su m in g arg ue nd o th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d, on th i s reco rd
, we

co nc lu de th at su ch erro r would be ha rm le ss. T he governm en t pr es en te d ev id en ce fro m

m ul ti pl e wit ne ss es th at th ey sa w Ada m s po ss es s th e fir earm , sa w hi m di sc ard it
, th en la te r he ard Ada m s ad m it to po ss es si ng th e fir earm

. It was th e jury's p r o v in ce to be li ev e o r di sb el ie ve th e te st im on y of a ny or al l o f th e o ffi cers

.

Afte r gr an ti ng th e g o v e r n ment 's m ot io n in li m in e, th e co ur t twi ce is su ed a li m it in g in st ru ct io n to th e jury—on ce at th e in tro du ct io n of Ada m s's pr io r co nv ic ti on s

an d ag ai n be fo re th e jury be ga n it s de li be rat io ns —t o on ly u s e t h e f a c t of Ada m s's

pr io r co nv ic ti on fo r th e li m it ed pu rp os es of sh owi ng kn owl ed ge or in te nt

. The fact s

The di st ric t co ur t ack no wle d g e d Eig ht Ci rcu it pr eced en t th at su ch pr io r 3

co nv ic ti on s ca n b e us ed to sh ow in te nt

. W e ha ve he ld th at "[w]hen ad m it te d for t he
pu rp os e of sh owi ng in te nt , th e pr io r act s ne ed no t be du p l i c a t es , bu t m us t be

su ffi ci en tl y si m il ar to su pp or t an in fere nc e of c riminal in te nt ." Uni te d St at es v. Sh of fn er , 71 F.3d 14 29 , 14 32 (8t h C ir. 1 99 5) (qu ot at io n o m it te d)

.
-9

-of th is cas e pr es en t li tt le li ke li ho od th at Ada m s's co nv ic ti on re s t e d so le ly on th e

po ss ib il it y th at th e jury ig no red th os e li m it in g in st ru ct io n s

. To th e de gr ee it

co ns id ered ev id en ce of Ada m s's pr io r cri m es , we pr es um e th e jury li m it ed it s us e to

pe rm it te d pu rp os es

. Se e St ro ud
, 67 3 F.3 d at 86 1 (fi nd in g th at "a li m it in g in st ru ct io n di m in is he s th e da ng er of un fai r pr ejud ic e ari si ng f r o m th e ad m is si on of ev id en ce" (q uo ta ti on om it te d) ); Hal k
, 63 4 F.3 d at 48 8 (s am e); Oak s , 6 0 6 F

. 3d at 53 9, n.2 (s am e); W

al ker , 47 0 F .3d at 1 27 5 (s am e).

The go ve rn m en t's ev id en ce th at Ada m s ha d be en pr ev io us ly co nv ic te d in st at e

an d fed eral co u r t s fo r un la wfu ll y po ss es si ng fir earm s ha d pr ob at iv e va lu e to sh ow th at he kn ew wha t a fir earm was an d th at he po ss es se d th e cri m in al in te nt to po ss es s th e fi rear m

un la wfu ll y

. Se e Uni te d S ta te s v. Was hb ur n , 72 8 F .3d 77 5, 7 84 (8t h C ir.
20 13 ) ("[ T] hi s co ur t ha s he ld in si m il ar ci rcu m st an ces th at th e un fai r pr ejud ic e di d no t

su bs ta nt ia ll y o u t w e i gh th e pr ob at iv e va lu e of a de fen da nt 's pr io r co nv ic ti on fo r si m il ar sc he m es be cau se th e cl os e si m il ari ty of th e pr io r in ci de nt s m ad e th e ev id en ce

es pe ci al ly pr ob at iv e on th e qu es ti on of th e de fen da nt 's in te nt an d t h e a b se nc e of
acci de nt ." (ci ta ti on om it te d) ).

III. Co nc lu si on Fo r th e reas on s st at ed he rei n, th e ad m is si on of t he Ru le 40 4( b) ev id en ce an d
Ada m s's co nv ic ti on is affi rm ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-1 0-