Evidence is relevant if it ...

Cf. United States v. Armijo, 5 F.3d 1229, 1232-1233 (9th Cir. 1993) (holding that the trial court erred in admitting a witness's unsworn prior inconsistent statement "because it was not given under oath." but "the admission of....A prior inconsistent statement of a witness is admissible, not only to impeach the witness, but also as substantive evidence -- to prove the truth of the matter previously asserted by the witness -- only if the prior consistent statement was made under oath.

United States v. Larson, 112 F.3d 600, 604 (2d Cir. 1997) (upholding trial court's admission of witness's testimony about accused's prior criminal sexual conduct with another minor because it was relevant as there was similarity of the events between the prior criminal sexual conduct and the offense...Applicable federal or state law determines who is a "child" for purposes of Federal Rule of Evidence or comparable state rules that authorize the use of other instances of child molestation or child sex abuse against criminal defendants who are on trial for child molestation or child sexual abuse.

United States v. Jordan, 509 F.3d 191, 202-203 (4th Cir. 2007) (upholding trial court's admission of witness Brown's statements to her friend Adams as statements against penal interest because Brown's statements which....Federal Rule of Evidence of Evidence 804(b)(3) or a comparable State rule creates a hearsay exception for a statement which was at the time of its making so far contrary to the declarant's pecuniary or proprietary interest, or so far tended to subject the declarant to civil or criminal liability, or to render invalid a claim by the declarant against another, that a reasonable person in the declarant's position would not have made the statement unless believing it to be true. A statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the accused is not admissible unless corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the trustworthiness of the statement.