Another act, wrong, or crime is admissible to show a motive for some alleged conduct on a particular occasion.

Cf. United States v. Solomon, 399 F.3d 1231, pin? (10th Cir. 2005) (convictions for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, and being a felon in possession of a firearm; defendant asserted that...The Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution grants a criminal defendant the right to introduce exculpatory evidence that is probative of and relevant to a material issue.

Fed. R. Evid. 103(d) advisory committee's note ("This wording of the plain error principle is from Rule 52(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. While judicial unwillingness to be constructed by mechanical breakdowns of the adversary system has been more pronounced in criminal cases, there is no scarcity of decisions to the same...An objection is unnecessary to preserve a claim of error and a trial court should exclude, on its own initiative, evidence offered against a criminal defendant or other disadvantaged party when admission of the evidence would be "plain error."

United States v. Aleskerova, 300 F.3d 286, 296-297 (2d Cir. 2002) (upholding trial court's admission into evidence of theater museum items because, "even though an in limine motion was insufficient to preserve for appeal objections based on deficiencies in foundation evidence," "it remained the...Evidence of another crime, wrong, or act is admissible if there is sufficient evidence to support a finding by a reasonable juror that the other crime, wrong, or act occurred. Clear and convincing evidence is unnecessary; "sufficient" means only that there must be enough evidence to make the other crime, wrong, or act relevant.