Whether the appropriate standard for admitting reverse Rule 404(b) evidence (a defendant's evidence of a third party's other acts offered to show the defendant's innocence) differs from the standard governing ordinary prosecution Rule 404(b) evidence.

1. United States v. Lucas357 F3D 599

   Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals · February 12, 2004

   “I am particularly persuaded that there is no abuse of discretion here since the issue is a close one and there is a split in the circuits as to the appropriate standard to apply to reverse 404(b) evidence — and, I agree with the majority that the only use of the evidence here would have been for the propensity inference, and that is not permitted by the straightforward Rule 404(b) analysis applied by the majority and the other circuits that have adopted this test.” — Acknowledges a circuit split

   Empirical analysis of this case →

Cases are grouped by the legal question they announce a split on, classified from the court's own acknowledgment sentence. Verified acknowledgments only. See all circuit splits.