context: Even if the Court considered this evidence inadmissible under Rule 404(b), the evidence would still be admissible under the "inclusionary" approach. A rational factfinder may reasonably infer that the stun gun, handcuff key and ski mask would tend to establish that Cruz had knowledge of, and intent or motive to possess, the firearm located within his vehicle.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 961 F.2d 1039, 1042
citation_a.parenthetical: upholding the admission of other firearms that were present in defendant's apartment and vehicle to establish defendant's knowledge of the presence of an Uzi in defendant's apartment
citation_a.sentence: See, e.g., United States v. Brown, 961 F.2d 1039, 1042 (2d Cir.1992) (upholding the admission of other firearms that were present in defendant’s apartment and vehicle to establish defendant’s knowledge of the presence of an Uzi in defendant’s apartment); see also United States v. Hatfield, 815 F.2d 1068, 1072-73 (6th Cir.1987) (upholding the admission of burglary tools and police scanners found in defendant’s van as probative evidence of defendant’s knowledge of presence of gun in the van).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 815 F.2d 1068, 1072-73
citation_b.parenthetical: upholding the admission of burglary tools and police scanners found in defendant's van as probative evidence of defendant's knowledge of presence of gun in the van
citation_b.sentence: See, e.g., United States v. Brown, 961 F.2d 1039, 1042 (2d Cir.1992) (upholding the admission of other firearms that were present in defendant’s apartment and vehicle to establish defendant’s knowledge of the presence of an Uzi in defendant’s apartment); see also United States v. Hatfield, 815 F.2d 1068, 1072-73 (6th Cir.1987) (upholding the admission of burglary tools and police scanners found in defendant’s van as probative evidence of defendant’s knowledge of presence of gun in the van).