Whether federal prosecutors can introduce evidence of a person's prior conviction for unlawful gun possession in a prosecution based on police testimony that the same person had physical possession of a firearm on a subsequent date—a weapon the accused denies ever having

QUESTION PRESENTED The circuits of the United States Court of Appeals disagree on whether federal prosecutors can introduce evidence of a person’s prior conviction for unlawful gun possession in a prosecution based on police testimony that the same person had physical possession of a firearm on a subsequent date—a weapon the accused denies ever having. Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(1) provides that “[e]vidence of a crime, wrong, or other act is not admissible to prove a person’s character in order to show that ona particular occasion the person acted in accordance with that character.” Rule 404(b) provides that evidence of a crime, wrong or other act “may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.” Three circuits hold that when an accused denies police claims of personal possession of a firearm, the question of “knowing” or “intentional” possession is not a material issue justifying proof of prior guilt for the same kind of conduct, and the prior convictions establish knowledge based on propensity inferences the rule prohibits. Two circuits deem the prior convictions may be shown when the accused denies the charge and demands a trial. The issue here is 1. Are prior gun possession convictions admissible under Rule 404(b) to prove knowing or intentional gun possession on a later date when the government claims the accused physically possessed a gun the defendant claims he never possessed? 2