In what circumstances will a court allow the prosecution to rely on propensity evidence in its closing argument?

Similarly, the propensity instruction cautioned that "[e]ach offense must stand on its own and you must keep the evidence of each offense separate. Stated differently, if you find or believe that the Accused is guilty of one offense, you may not use that finding or belief as a basis for inferring, assuming, or proving that he committed any other offense." (Tr. at 96 [ECF NO 10-6.]) Despite the prosecution's reliance on propensity evidence in closing argument, there was sufficient corroborated testimonial evidence, along with repeated instruction that the panel had to find each charged offense supported by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, to conclude that even if it was error for the panel to be instructed that it could consider propensity evidence, any error was harmless. Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 (1967).