This is a cross reference. Click here to make the jump.

Cf. United States v. Hunt, 521 F.3d 636, 643 (6th Cir. 2008) (upholding trial court's exclusion of two statements in Noble's affidavit because the statements were not admissible under the residual hearsay exception as they lacked trustworthiness ).A statement not specifically covered by Federal Rule of Evidence 803 or 804 or by comparable State rules, but having equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness, is not excluded by the hearsay rule, if the court determines that (A) the statement is offered as evidence of a material fact; (B) the statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts; and (C) the general purposes of these rules and the interests of justice will best be served by admission of the statement into evidence.

Mosser v. Freuhauf Corp., 940 F.2d 77, 81 (4th Cir. 1991) (upholding the trial court's exclusion of decedent's trafffic or speeding citations where such evidence was unrelated to the incident in question ).The prohibition against circumstantial use of character -- the use of character or disposition to show conduct on a particular occasion -- applies in trials of civil actions.

Cf. United States v. Lawrence, 349 F.3d 109, 117 (3d Cir. 2003) (upholding trial court's exclusion into evidence of the victim's hospital bed identification of another suspect as a dying declaration because defendant failed....Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(2) or a comparable State rule creates a hearsay exception in a prosecution for homicide or in a civil action or proceeding, for a statement by a declarant made when the declarant believes that his or her death is imminent, about the cause or circumstances of what the declarant believes to be his or her impending death.