HEADNOTE: Mario Rodriguez Gutierrez v. State of Maryland, No. 98 ...

majority’s conclusion that any of Sgt. Norris’ other propositions has that special relevance
that Rule 5-404(b) requires for admission, arguing that they have “no logical tendency” to
show motive and only serve to show his propensity toward violent acts by associating the
defendant with the violent practices of the MS-13 gang. See United States v. Ring, 513 F.2d
1001, 1006 (6th Cir. 1975) (citing United States v. Birns, 395 F.2d 943 (6th Cir. 1968))
(During the defendant's trial for mailing threatening letters, where previous letters received
by the victim did not indicate that the defendant had any relationship with the victim’s wife,
as asserted by the government, the court held that the prior threats had “no logical tendency”
to show a motive.). I agree with the appellant.
A.
Md. Rule 5-404(b), provides that “[e]vidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not
admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith.
It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity,
intent, preparation, common scheme or plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or
accident.” This Rule’s purpose is to limit the admissibility of evidence offered to prove
criminal propensity. Membership in MS-13 and adherence to its practices and culture fit the
definition of “other wrongs” or “bad acts,” since “they are activit[ies] or conduct, not
necessarily criminal, that tend[] to impugn or reflect adversely upon one's character, taking
into consideration the facts of the underlying lawsuit.” Klauenberg v. State, 355 Md. 528,
549, 735 A.2d 1061, 1072 (1999).
It has been well established by this Court that “other crimes, wrongs or acts evidence
6