Relevancy and reasons for excluding relevant evidence - Other crimes, acts, transactions, and events

Learning Outcomes

After reading this article, you will be able to identify when evidence of other crimes, acts, or events is relevant and when it must be excluded under the Federal Rules of Evidence. You will understand the general prohibition on propensity evidence, the recognized exceptions (such as MIMIC), and the requirements for admissibility of such evidence, enabling you to answer MBE questions on this topic with confidence.

MBE Syllabus

For MBE, you are required to understand the rules governing the admissibility of evidence of other crimes, acts, transactions, and events. This includes:

  • The general rule excluding evidence of other crimes or acts to prove character or propensity.
  • The recognized exceptions allowing such evidence for non-propensity purposes (e.g., motive, intent, identity, absence of mistake, common plan).
  • The requirements for admissibility and the need for sufficient proof of the other act.
  • The risk of unfair prejudice and the court’s discretion to exclude otherwise relevant evidence.
  • The distinction between criminal and civil cases regarding use of other acts evidence.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

  1. Evidence that a defendant previously committed a similar crime is generally:
    1. Always admissible to show the defendant’s bad character.
    2. Admissible only if the defendant testifies.
    3. Inadmissible to prove propensity, but may be admissible for certain non-propensity purposes.
    4. Admissible only in civil cases.
  2. In a criminal trial, evidence that the defendant used the same unique method in a prior crime may be admitted to show:
    1. The defendant’s general criminal disposition.
    2. Identity under the MIMIC exceptions.
    3. The defendant’s right to remain silent.
    4. The defendant’s motive to testify.
  3. Which of the following is NOT a valid non-propensity purpose for admitting evidence of other acts?
    1. Motive.
    2. Intent.
    3. Propensity.
    4. Absence of mistake.

Introduction

Evidence of other crimes, acts, transactions, or events is often highly relevant but also highly prejudicial. The Federal Rules of Evidence generally prohibit using such evidence to show a person’s character or propensity to act in a certain way. However, there are important exceptions where other acts evidence may be admitted for specific, non-propensity purposes. Understanding these rules and their exceptions is essential for success on the MBE.

The General Rule: Exclusion of Propensity Evidence

The Federal Rules of Evidence bar the use of other crimes, wrongs, or acts to prove that a person acted in conformity with a particular character trait on a specific occasion. This is known as the prohibition on propensity evidence.

Key Term: Propensity Evidence Evidence offered to show that a person has a certain character trait and acted in accordance with that trait on a particular occasion.

Exceptions: Admissibility for Non-Propensity Purposes (MIMIC)

Evidence of other acts may be admissible if offered for a purpose other than to show propensity. The most commonly tested non-propensity purposes are summarized by the acronym MIMIC:

  • Motive
  • Intent
  • absence of Mistake or accident
  • Identity (including modus operandi)
  • Common plan or scheme

Key Term: MIMIC Rule The principle that evidence of other acts may be admitted for non-propensity purposes such as motive, intent, absence of mistake, identity, or common plan.

When offered for a MIMIC purpose, the evidence must be relevant to a material issue in the case and its probative value must not be substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice.

Requirements for Admissibility

Before admitting evidence of other acts, the court must determine:

  1. The evidence is being offered for a permissible, non-propensity purpose.
  2. There is sufficient evidence that the other act occurred (usually a preponderance standard).
  3. The probative value is not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice (Rule 403 balancing).

Key Term: Rule 403 Balancing The process by which a court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice, confusion, or waste of time.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

In criminal cases, other acts evidence is most often offered by the prosecution to prove a material issue such as intent or identity. In civil cases, such evidence is rarely admissible unless character is directly at issue (e.g., defamation, negligent hiring).

Worked Example 1.1

A defendant is on trial for arson. The prosecution seeks to introduce evidence that the defendant set fire to another building five years earlier using the same rare accelerant and method. The defendant objects, arguing this is inadmissible character evidence.

Answer: The evidence is not being offered to show propensity, but to show identity through a unique modus operandi (MIMIC: Identity). If the prosecution can show sufficient proof that the prior act occurred, and the method is distinctive, the evidence may be admitted.

Worked Example 1.2

In a fraud case, the plaintiff offers evidence that the defendant previously used the same false documents in a different transaction with another victim. Is this evidence admissible?

Answer: Yes, if offered to show intent to defraud or absence of mistake, not to show the defendant’s general dishonesty. The court must still weigh the probative value against the risk of unfair prejudice.

Exam Warning

Evidence of other acts is never admissible solely to show that a person is the type to commit the charged act. Always identify the specific, non-propensity purpose for which the evidence is offered. Courts will strictly enforce this rule.

Revision Tip

When analyzing an MBE question, ask: Is the evidence being offered to show character/propensity (inadmissible), or for a specific MIMIC purpose (potentially admissible)?

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

  • Evidence of other crimes, acts, or events is generally inadmissible to prove character or propensity.
  • The MIMIC rule allows admission for non-propensity purposes: motive, intent, absence of mistake, identity, or common plan.
  • The court must find sufficient proof that the other act occurred and conduct Rule 403 balancing.
  • In criminal cases, other acts evidence is most often offered by the prosecution for a material issue; in civil cases, such evidence is rarely admissible.
  • Evidence offered solely to show propensity is always inadmissible.

Key Terms and Concepts

  • Propensity Evidence
  • MIMIC Rule
  • Rule 403 Balancing
The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
AdaptiBar
One-time Fee
$395
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
BarPrepHero
One-time Fee
$299
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350
Quimbee
One-time Fee
$1,199

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal