Fill and Sign the In the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware David Form

4 Similar Acts Evidence (Rule 404(b), F.R.E.) During the course of the trial, as you know from the instructions I gave you then, you heard evidence of acts of the Defendant which may be similar to those charged in the indictment, but which were committed on other occasions. You must not consider any of this evidence in deciding if the Defendant committed the acts charged in the indictment. However, you may consider this evidence for other, very limited, purposes. If you find beyond a reasonable doubt from other evidence in this case that the Defendant did commit the acts charged in the indictment, then you may consider evidence of the similar acts allegedly committed on other occasions to determine [whether the Defendant had the state of mind or intent necessary to commit the crime charged in the indictment] or [whether the Defendant acted according to a plan or in preparation for commission of a crime] or [whether the Defendant committed the acts for which the Defendant is on trial by accident or mistake]. ANNOTATIONS AND COMMENTS Rule 404. [F.R.E.] Character Evidence Not Admissible To Prove Conduct; Except ions; Other Crimes* * * * * (b) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts. Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity there with. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, provided that upon request by the accused, the prosecution in a criminal case shall provide reasonable notice in advance of trial, or during trial if the court excuses pretrial notice on good cause shown, of the general nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial. United States v. Beechum, 582 F.2d 898 (5th Cir. 1 97 8) (en banc) cert. denied, 440 U.S. 920, 99 S.Ct . 12 44 , 5 9 L.Ed.2 d 472 (19 79 ), discusses at length the tests to be applied in admitting or excluding evidence under Rule 404(b); and, more specifically, the different standards that apply depending upon the purpose of the evidence, i.e., to show intent versus identity, for example. See note 15 at pages 911-9 12. Beechum also approves a limiting instruction similar to this one. See note 23 at pages 917-918.