Whether the federal courts are free to withdraw the protection from undue prejudice which emanates from the required four-step process as set forth in Huddleston v. United States

QUESTION PRESENTED TT Petitoner alleged that the district court failed to follow . Supreme Court precedent in the admission of evidence pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), resulting in due process violation. Petitioner was convicted of eleven bank robberies, that were committed over the course of four years, without any : direct evidence or witness testimony connecting him to the robberies. In finding no error, the Third Circuit relied upon the Government's statement of the facts on direct appeal, but significantly misstated even those slanted versions of the facts, rejecting vertical stare decisis. This case thus presents the following question: Whether the federal courts are free to withdraw the protection from undue prejudice which emanates from the required four-step process as set forth in Huddleston v. United States, ; 485 U.S. 681, 691-92, 108 S.Ct. 1496, 99 L.Ed. 771 (1988) prior to the admission of a prior conviction, for the same crime as : that being tried, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 404 (b)? SE TKS .