Does the Fifth Circuit's rule that a plea of not guilty to a conspiracy charge automatically renders similar, extrinsic acts admissible as relevant to the issue of intent conflict with the plain text of Rule 404(b), as well as this Court's precedent?

QUESTION PRESENTED This case arises from a significant conflict in the Circuit Courts of Appeals regarding the admissibility of extrinsic evidence under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) when a plea of not guilty to a conspiracy charge is entered. The Fifth Circuit has held that a plea of not guilty to a conspiracy charge automatically renders extrinsic evidence of acts similar to the charged offense relevant to “intent” and thus admissible under Rule 404(b). In addition to the Fifth Circuit, the First, Eighth, and Eleventh Circuits have also adopted this rule. Conversely, the Second, Third, Fourth, and Seventh Circuits have expressly rejected it. The question presented is: Does the Fifth Circuit’s rule that a plea of not guilty to a conspiracy charge automatically renders similar, extrinsic acts admissible as relevant to the issue of intent conflict with the plain text of Rule 404(b), as well as this Court’s precedent? 1