the accused. Jones v. United States, 477 A.2d 231, 237 (D.C. 1984); Campbell v. United States, 450 A.2d 428, 430 (D.C.1982). Such evidence may be admissible, however, if relevant to (1) motive, (2) intent, (3) absence of mistake or accident, (4) a common scheme or plan, or (5) identity. Drew v. United Stat who “rang doorbells, peered into windows, wandered between houses and bushes, posed as a salesman and workman, followed one woman, and gave an alias to an inquisitive police officer ... albeit strange, is not sufficiently ‘criminal’ to fall within Drew’s scope”); Evans v. United States, 417 A.2d 963, 966 (D.C.1980) (“there is no compelling inference that the use of a credit card bearing another’s name is a criminal act” constituting other crimes); see also, Jones, 477 A.2d at 237-38 (<HOLDING>); Punch v. United States, 377 A.2d 1353, 1358
holding direct testimony tying a defendant to a gun was not required when the gun was found in the defendants truck and when the defendant had both ammunition for the gun and a rack in which it could have been kept holding that evidence was sufficient to prove defendant constructively possessed the gun where although defendant denied ownership of the gun it was found near a knife of which defendant claimed ownership and where defendant was aware of the presence of the gun holding that evidence of appellants prior gun possession was admissible in a homicide prosecution to show malice and intent possession of a gun without more is not wrongful conduct holding that evidence of a 10yearold drug conviction was properly admitted to show intent in a prosecution for possession with intent to distribute holding that prior possession of a firearm is admissible to show knowledge in a prosecution for knowingly possessing a similar weapon