Federal Rule of Evidence 413 and comparable rules in a few States create an express exception to the prohibition against circumstantial use of character, the prohibition against the use of character to show conduct. Rules such as Rule 413 provide that in a criminal trial for sexual assault evidence of the defendant's commission of another offense or offenses of sexual assault is admissible.

Koloda v. General Motors Parts Div., 716 F.2d 373, 376 (6th Cir. 1983).To be admissible, prior events or accidents must be substantially similar to those at issue in trial.

United States v. Weiland, 420 F.3d 1062, 1077 (9th Cir. 2005) (upholding trial court's admission of the documents in the 'penitentiary packet' and the certifications by Oklahoma records custodian Greene and the Secretary....The right of confrontation guaranteed by the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution puts no constraints on the admissibility of nontestimonial hearsay statements; the federal constitutional right of confrontation does not apply to such statements.

Goodman v. Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, 293 F.3d 655, 669 n.10 (3d Cir. 2002) (holding, in plaintiff employee's action against defendant commission for political discrimination, that the trial court properly admitted the excerpts from....An exception to the hearsay rule applies to the following records of government offices and agencies: (A) public records that set forth the activities of the government office or agency; (B) public records that set forth observations that a government office or agency was required to make and report but this exception does not apply in criminal cases to observations of police officers and other law enforcement personnel; or (C) in civil actions and proceedings and in criminal cases when offered against the government, factual findings resulting from an investigation made pursuant to authority granted by law, unless the sources of information or other circumstances indicate the untrustworthiness of such findings.