Terri Ann Payseno, 332 P.3d 1176

In July 2012 two White Horse saddles were taken from Tracy Loughlin’s trailer; receipts show Terri Payseno sold two matching saddles to a Billings pawn shop on July 30, 2012. Payseno told police she bought them from an unidentified person and sold them for $600.
Payseno also told police she had pawned a saddle in Riverton in early August 2012; her sister Kim Dooper testified that saddle belonged to Kim and had been loaned back to Payseno.
The State charged Payseno with larceny, wrongful disposal (receiving/concealing/disposing) of property, and burglary relating to Loughlin’s saddles.
Before trial the State notified it would offer evidence of the Riverton pawn (other bad act) under W.R.E. 404(b) for purposes including plan, knowledge, and absence of mistake. Payseno moved to exclude.
The district court admitted testimony and the recorded interview in which Payseno discussed pawning the Riverton saddle; Payseno was convicted on all counts.
On appeal the Wyoming Supreme Court concluded the Riverton-pawn evidence was improperly admitted under Rule 404(b) but the error was harmless because the properly admitted evidence of guilty knowledge was overwhelming.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Payseno)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether district court abused discretion by admitting testimony of pawning sister’s saddle under W.R.E. 404(b)	Evidence was irrelevant, improperly offered to show propensity, and occurred after charged acts so cannot show preparation/plan	Evidence showed Payseno’s familiarity with pawning, plan/preparation, and absence of mistake — i.e., guilty knowledge	Court: Admission was an abuse of discretion; evidence not admissible under 404(b) for plan or guilty knowledge
Whether post-offense other-act evidence can show preparation/plan or guilty knowledge	Post-offense act cannot show planning/preparation for earlier crime; not sufficiently similar to charged acts	Other-act (even post-offense) can show knowledge of how/where to dispose stolen goods and lack of mistake	Court: Post-offense pawning was not sufficiently similar or timely to show plan or guilty knowledge; 404(b) admission improper
Whether improperly admitted 404(b) evidence requires reversal	Admission was prejudicial and affected substantial rights	Even if erroneously admitted, the properly admitted evidence was overwhelming so error was harmless	Court: Error harmless; conviction affirmed
Whether jury should have been given limiting instruction on 404(b) evidence	Required when 404(b) evidence admitted over objection	Court had discretion; parties could request instruction	Court noted instruction requirement but outcome unaffected; no reversal

Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988) (allowing other-act evidence to prove guilty knowledge where acts closely similar and temporally related)
Vigil v. State, 926 P.2d 351 (Wyo. 1996) (adopting a four-part test for admission of uncharged misconduct evidence under Rule 404(b))
Vanvorst v. State, 1 P.3d 1223 (Wyo. 2000) (listing factors that, with recent possession, support inference of guilty knowledge)
Cazier v. State, 148 P.3d 23 (Wyo. 2006) (affirming that other-act evidence may not be admitted solely to show bad character or propensity)