Subject to limitations, evidence that tends to repair a witness's credibility is admissible after the credibility of the witness has been attacked.

Neuner v. Clinkenbeard, 466 F. Supp. 54, 55 (W.D. Okla. 1978) (holding, in plaintiffs' diversity action against defendant, that defendant's plea to a criminal charge of any of the contents of the plea was properly....Federal Rule of Evidence 410 or a comparable State rule bars the use of a nolo contendere plea (no contest plea) as evidence in any proceeding against the defendant who entered this plea.

Fed. R. Evid. 803(2) ("A statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition.").A statement falls within the hearsay exception created by Federal Rule of Evidence 803(2) or a comparable State rule for excited utterances, only if the declarant (the maker of the statement) was under the stress of the startling event or condition when he or she made the statement that relates to that startling event or condition.

United States v. Cerno, 529 F.3d 926, pin? (10th Cir. 2008) (conviction for aggravated sexual abuse in Indian country; defendant, invoking Fed.R.Evid. 403, contended that his conviction must be reversed because the district court improperly allowed the prosecutor to question...If a crime or act by a witness did not result in a criminal conviction but is probative of truthfulness and not unduly prejudicial, it may sometimes be used to impeach the witness.