A person's other crimes, wrongs, or acts are inadmissible if they are offered to show the character, or propensity, of that person in order to show that that person engaged in some specific behavior on a specific occasion.

Cf. United States v. Sesay, 313 F.3d 591, 598-600 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (upholding trial court's exclusion of a statement from a police report [that witnesses at the scene of the shooting saw the victim with the gun] as hearsay....A statement is not hearsay if the statement is offered to show a person's belief or state of mind and the relevance of the person's belief or state of mind does not depend on the truth or falsity of the statement.

United States v. Davis, 457 F.3d 817, 825 (8th Cir. 2006) (upholding trial court's admission of testimony of cooperating witness about the statements of drug purchaser which identified defendant as the source of crack....A statement falls within the hearsay exemption for statements of co-conspirators only if the statement was made in furtherance of the conspiracy.

Cf. United States v. Nebraska Beef, Ltd., 194 F. Supp. 2d 949, 957 (D. Neb. 2002) (holding, in defendants' motions to dismiss indictment for immigration related offenses, that their Sixth Amendment right to Compulsory Process was violated....The prohibition, grounded in the Compulsory Process Clause, against deliberate government action that deprives a criminal defendant of the relevant and material exculpatory testimony of a witness may effectively limit the government's use of hearsay evidence against a criminal defendant.