MT · rules
Mont. R. Evid. 404
Character evidence not admissible to prove conduct, exceptions; other crimes; character in issue
(a) Character evidence generally. Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is
not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion,
except:
(1) Character of accused. Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an
accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same.
(2) Character of victim. Evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of
the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or evidence of a character
trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case or in an assault
case where the victim is incapable of testifying to rebut evidence that the victim was the first
aggressor.
(3) Character of witness. Evidence of the character of a witness, as provided in
Article VI.
(b) Other crimes, wrongs, acts. Evidence 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, plan,
knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.
(c) Character in issue. Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is admissible
in cases in which character or a trait of character of a person is an essential element of a charge,
claim, or defense.
Provenance
- Source
- courts.mt.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-15
- Edition
- 2026-09-15
- Content hash
48a15ec465d0cb968152bbe17649c1a7b348d2b2127e42ca55482e29e66f8290
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.