(i) Due process and other constitutional limits on government use of irrelevant or weak inculpatory evidence in criminal trials; and (ii) constitutionally-grounded mandates for the admissibility of probative exculpatory evidence in criminal trials.

United States v. Tocco, 135 F.3d 116, 128-129 (2d Cir. 1998) (upholding trial court's admission of Marziano's testimony about co-defendant Mario's nod as an adoptive admission because (1) "Marziano testified that he....An adoptive admission is exempt from the prohibition against hearsay evidence.

United States v. Blum, 62 F.3d 63, 68 (2d Cir. 1995) (holding that evidence of witness's similar misconduct or wrongful acts was admissible where it was relevant to show third party's personal motive).Evidence of a criminal or wrongful act apart from the act that at issue at trial Is not barred by the prohibition against circumstantial use of character if intent, knowledge, mistake, or accident is a legally-material factual issue, the opposing party suggests the non-existence of knowledge or urges mistake or accident as a defense, and evidence of another crime, wrong, or act is offered to prove the knowledge or the absence of mistake or accident by a criminal defendant or other person.

Fed. R. Evid. 804(b)(6) advisory committee's note ("Rule 804(b)(6) has been added to provide that a party forfeits the right to object on hearsay grounds to the admission of a declarant's prior statement when the party's deliberate wrongdoing or acquiescence therein procured the unavailability of the declarant as a witness. This recognizes...A statement of an unavailable declarant is not barred by the hearsay rule if the opposing party deliberately acted to prevent the declarant from testifying.