The cases exhibit disagreement and confusion about whether volitional (rather than semi-automatic) activity by or within an organization qualifies as a "routine practice" of an organization for purposes of Federal Rule of Evidence 406 or a comparable State rule.

United States v. Udeozor, 515 F.3d 260, 267-268 (4th Cir. 2008) (upholding trial court's admission of two police recorded telephone conversations [between the victim and defendant's husband] as statements against penal....A statement qualifies as a statement against interest for purposes of the hearsay exception for statements against interest only if the statement, at the time the declarant made it, was so contrary to the declarant's interest that a reasonable person in the declarant's position would not have made if the declarant had believed the statement to be untrue.

United States v. Adams, 401 F.3d 886, 899 (8th Cir. 2005) (upholding trial court's admission into evidence (1) of accused Parker's prior drug convictions, and (2) of accused Adams' participation in the Serrano conspiracy, where both accused conceded the relevancy of the evidence to prove knowledge and...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. 606(b) ("Upon an inquiry into the validity of a verdict or indictment, a juror may not testify as to any matter or statement occurring during the course of the jury's deliberations or to the effect of anything upon that or any other juror's mind or emotions as influencing the juror to assent to or dissent from the verdict...A juror may not testify about any statement or matter occurring during jury deliberations, or about the mental processes or emotions that may have influenced jurors' votes on the verdict.