reasonably necessary. We affirm. Jurisdiction in the district court was proper based upon 18 U.S.C. § 3231. Jurisdiction in this court is proper based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The notice of appeal was timely filed pursuant to Fed. ít.App. P. 4(b). Background In the underlying criminal matter, defendant was indicted on August 22, 1995, on one count of possession of materials involving the sexual exploitation of a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B). The indictment was based on three sexually explicit photographs, found in defendant’s home, which he had taken of his twelve-year-old stepdaughter. Defendant was tried before a jury and found guilty. On appeal, this court vacated the conviction based upon an evidentiary issue. United States v. Heidebur, 122 F.3d 577 (8th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). On remand, defendant pled guilty. On January
holding that district courts admission of evidence that defendant had sexually molested his stepdaughter was improper because it showed propensity and was not probative of his knowing possession of the photographs holding improper admission of hearsay evidence is reversible error only when the admission causes prejudice recognizing trial courts discretion in weighing the allegedlyimproper prejudicial aspects of photographs of victims against the photographs probative value holding that evidence of violent crimes and other illegal activities of defendants gang was not unduly prejudicial because defendant was not directly implicated and the evidence was probative of elements of the crimes that the defendant was charged with holding that district courts findings were not clearly erroneous where there was  sufficient evidence  that the defendants waiver of his rights was knowing and intelligent