Whether prior gun possession convictions are admissible under Rule 404(b) to prove knowing or intentional gun possession on a later date

QUESTION PRESENTED Entrenched disagreement exists among six circuits on whether Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) prohibits proof of a prior gun conviction in a new prosecution alleging that a suspect threw away a gun that the accused denies ever possessing. Rule 404(b)(1) provides “[e]vidence of a crime, wrong, or other act is not admissible to prove a person’s character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with that character.” Here, the U.S. Attorney claimed a 2010 conviction for gun possession proved a new charge he possessed a gun in 2020 by showing “the history of the intent, the knowledge of and the prior pattern or habit of this Defendant[.]” The District Court allowed the evidence, reasoning a demand for trial makes the statutory element of knowing possession categorically material under Rule 404(b)(2). Three circuits rule otherwise, reasoning that a prior gun crime only proves a later possession of a firearm as propensity, unless the accused claims he mistook it for a toy or accidentally possessed it. A concurring judge here summarized the conflict of this view with Rule 404(b)(1): The scenario usually proceeds this way: the government asserts that the prior conviction is relevant to knowledge, intent, and absence of mistake—a kitchen-sink approach because no one really understands Rule 404(b) the way we have interpreted it. The district court then asks why, and the government usually responds with some variation of ‘the Eighth Circuit says so.’ The truth is that a prior conviction is irrelevant in most actual-possession cases, unless, of course, the whole point is to allow the jury to make a propensity inference. . .. The Circuit decisions that declare old convictions admissible by reasoning a trial demand makes knowledge categorically material conflict with Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988), and Fed. R. Evid. 401-404. This case is the vehicle to resolve the conflict on this issue: 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