Statements exempted from the hearsay rule are not made inadmissible by the hearsay rule even when such statements are offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted and even when such statements thus otherwise satisfy the definition of hearsay provided by Federal Rules of Evidence 801(a) and 801(c) or by similar State rules.

United States v. Lopez, 340 F.3d 169, 175-177 (3d Cir. 2003) (reversing convictions for possession of heroin, and possession of contraband by an inmate because "the challenged statements constituted inadmissible hearsay,....Hearsay is a statement that (i) is made other than at the trial or proceeding at which it is offered and (ii) is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted by the maker of the statement, the declarant.

United States v. Coumaris, 399 F.3d 343, 348-349 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (upholding the trial court's in limine ruling which permitted the prosecution to cross-examine accused's character witnesses on his past acts; held, "accused clearly waived his objection to the district court's in limine ruling by failing...If a criminal defendant offers evidence of his or her character circumstantially - to show he or she did not commit the crime charged -- the prosecution can offer rebutting evidence of defendant's character.

See United States v. Leichtman, 742 F.2d 598, 603-604 (11th Cir. 1984) (upholding trial court's admission into evidence of a marijuana transaction where it was inextricably intertwined with the evidence necessary to prove the crime charged as it was necessary to prove motive, to establish context,...Other crimes, wrongs, or acts are admissible and do not violate the prohibition against the use of character to show conduct if such acts are admissible to show the context of an event at issue at trial or to tell the full story or an intelligible story of a series of events at issue at trial.