Under Rule 404(b), which statement is accurate about admissible purposes?

Under Rule 404(b), which statement is accurate about admissible purposes?

• A. To prove the defendant's propensity or character.
• B. To prove motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake when relevant.
• C. It may impeach any witness without relevance.
• D. It may be used to show the defendant's character regardless of relevance.

Answer: (B)

Rule 404(b) allows evidence of other acts to be admitted for purposes other than proving the defendant’s character or propensity. When such acts are relevant, they can be used to show a material fact like motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident. This is why the statement listing those specific purposes is accurate: it reflects the legitimate, non-propensity uses of other-acts evidence under Rule 404(b). This kind of evidence cannot be used to prove the defendant’s character or propensity, and it isn’t a blanket tool to impeach a witness without relevance. It also isn’t appropriate to suggest the defendant’s character regardless of relevance.

Rule 404(b) allows evidence of other acts to be admitted for purposes other than proving the defendant’s character or propensity. When such acts are relevant, they can be used to show a material fact like motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident. This is why the statement listing those specific purposes is accurate: it reflects the legitimate, non-propensity uses of other-acts evidence under Rule 404(b).

This kind of evidence cannot be used to prove the defendant’s character or propensity, and it isn’t a blanket tool to impeach a witness without relevance. It also isn’t appropriate to suggest the defendant’s character regardless of relevance.