Of the numerous provisions in the Indiana Rules of Evidence, few have proved as complicated in application as Rule 404(b). The rule-which provides generally that evidence of crimes, wrongs, or acts other than the conduct that is the subject of the particular case is not admissible as proof of the actor's character, but is admissible for other purposes'-has produced challenging cases in each of the years since the Indiana Rules of Evidence went into effect in 1994. This past year was no exception, as decisions of the Indiana Supreme Court and the Indiana Court of Appeals confronted the numerous problems of application raised by the rule.2 Because the rule remains the subject of confusion eight years after the adoption of the Indiana Rules of Evidence, and more than twenty-five years after the adoption of a parallel provision in the Federal Rules of Evidence, this Article will focus not on the full range of issues addressed by the courts under the Indiana Rules of Evidence during the survey period, but rather will focus on the past year's Rule 404(b) cases.