United States v. Fredrick Graham, 680 F. App'x 489

Police detectives in unmarked car with “POLICE” clothing observed Graham acting furtive, approach a porch, adjust his waistband, and then flee when approached.
During foot chase, Graham removed and threw a loaded Sig Sauer pistol; officers recovered the gun and later seized a ski mask and gloves from his person; Graham later said he thought about shooting an officer.
Graham, a felon, was charged under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (felon in possession of a firearm); he pleaded not guilty and declined to stipulate prior convictions, forcing the government to prove each element.
Government sought to admit evidence of Graham’s 2009 firearm-related arrest (officers found a loaded pistol in a discarded jacket) under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b); district court admitted the evidence with a limiting instruction.
Graham proposed a jury instruction and certification to guard against implicit racial bias; the district court refused and instead gave standard instructions including a Rule 404(b) limiting instruction.
The jury convicted; Graham appealed the admission of the 2009-arrest evidence and the refusal to give his implicit-bias instruction; the Eighth Circuit affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) of 2009 firearm arrest	2009 arrest is only propensity evidence and irrelevant because defense was denial of possession, not lack of knowledge/intent	Evidence shows knowledge and intent for possession and is thus relevant; Rule 404(b) permits admission for that purpose	Admitted: prior firearm possession is relevant to knowledge/intent when defendant pleads not guilty; court did not abuse discretion
Prejudice vs. probative value of 2009 arrest evidence	Probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice	Probative value outweighed prejudice; limiting instruction and limited use mitigate risk	No abuse: district court reasonably found probative value > prejudice and gave limiting instructions
Requested jury instruction on implicit racial bias	Requested explicit instruction and certification to counteract juror implicit bias	Standard instructions and anti-prejudice language suffice; court has discretion on instructions	Denied: district court did not abuse discretion; instructions fairly and adequately submitted issues

United States v. Williams, 796 F.3d 951 (8th Cir. 2015) (Rule 404(b) is a rule of inclusion; admissible evidence presumed if for permissible purpose)
United States v. Bassett, 762 F.3d 681 (8th Cir. 2014) (404(b) reversal only when evidence clearly only shows propensity)
United States v. Wilson, 619 F.3d 787 (8th Cir. 2010) (presumption of admissibility for permissible 404(b) evidence)
United States v. Robinson, 639 F.3d 489 (8th Cir. 2011) (404(b) requires relevance to material issue and that prejudice not substantially outweigh probative value)
United States v. Walker, 470 F.3d 1271 (8th Cir. 2006) (prior firearm possession relevant to show knowledge and intent)
United States v. Oaks, 606 F.3d 530 (8th Cir. 2010) (defendant’s not-guilty plea places knowledge at issue for 922(g)(1) prosecutions)
United States v. Halk, 634 F.3d 482 (8th Cir. 2011) (previous firearm possessions admissible to show knowledge/intent when defendant discarded gun)
United States v. Cook, 454 F.3d 938 (8th Cir. 2006) (404(b) evidence inherently prejudicial but admissible when probative value not substantially outweighed)
United States v. Kent, 531 F.3d 642 (8th Cir. 2008) (limiting instruction reduces risk of unfair prejudice)
United States v. Farish, 535 F.3d 815 (8th Cir. 2008) (district court has broad discretion in crafting jury instructions)