The exclusion of exculpatory evidence in a criminal trial does not violate the due constitutional right to present a defense if the grounds for exclusion are not arbitrary or disproportionate.

United States v. Johnson, 495 F.3d 951, 970 (8th Cir. 2007) (upholding trial court's admission of the hearsay statements of the victim as well as defendant's former boyfriend because "the court reasonably found a....A criminal defendant forfeits his or her constitutional right of confrontation as a result of an action that prevents a witness from testifying only if the defendant's action was done for the purpose of preventing the witness from testifying.

United States v. Gonzalez, 533 F.3d 1057, 1061-1063 (9th Cir. 2008) (holding that the trial court erroneously admitted into evidence the officer's retelling of Tirado's story as prior consistent statement because "the retelling....A prior statement of a witness is exempt from the prohibition against hearsay evidence if the prior statement is consistent with the witness' testimony at the trial or hearing at which the prior statement is offered, the prior statement is offered to rebut a express or implied charge of recent fabrication or motive, and the witness who made the prior statement testifies and is subject to cross-examination at the trial or hearing at which the prior statement is offered.

United States v. Montgomery, 384 F.3d 1050, 1062 (9th Cir. 2004) (upholding trial court's admission of government's report detailing individual fraudulent acts because it was inextricably intertwined with the conspiracy charge as the acts themselves comprised the conspiracy).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.