(1) that the defendant knowingly made a false statement to a licensed firearms dealer, (2) that the false statement was made in acquisition of a firearm, and (3) that the false statement was intended or likely to deceive the firearms dealer with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale ove either that the defendant made the statement with the intent to deceive the firearms dealer, or that the statement was of such nature that it was likely to deceive the dealer. See Dillon, 150 F.3d at 759. Both the knowledge and specific intent elements require evidence relating to the state of mind of the defendant; more significantly, both may be negated by evidence that the defendant labored under an honest misunderstanding of the facts. See Bryan, 524 U.S. at 192, 118 S.Ct. 1939 (<HOLDING>) (internal quotation omitted). In either case,
recognizing a common knowledge exception holding there was no rule 404b violation where the evidence was admitted to show knowledge and knowledge was an element of the crime charged recognizing that duty to warn of dangerous conditions could be based on constructive knowledge of that condition as well as actual knowledge recognizing common knowledge exception holding that the knowledge requisite to knowing violation of a statute is factual knowledge as distinguished from knowledge of the law