Is there any case law where evidence has been found that a defendant committed another rape shortly after the charged crime was committed?

In People v. Balcom (1994) 7 Cal.4th 414, 418, our high court considered the propriety of admitting, in a prosecution for rape, evidence that defendant had committed another rape shortly after the charged offense. The victim testified that the defendant placed a gun to her head and forced her to engage in sexual intercourse; the defendant testified he had not used a gun and that after a conversation, the two had engaged in consensual intercourse. (Id. at pp. 419-420, 422.) The court concluded the evidence of the uncharged offense was not admissible to prove intent: on the evidence, the question for the jury to decide was whether the defendant forced the victim to engage in intercourse by placing a gun to her head, and if it decided he had done so, no reasonable juror could have concluded he lacked the requisite intent to commit rape. (Id. at p. 422423.) Thus, while evidence of the uncharged crime would have some relevance to his intent, it would be cumulative, and its probative value to prove intent would be outweighed by the prejudicial value of the evidence. (Id. at p. 423.) The court concluded the evidence was admissible, however, to prove common design or plan, where the question was whether the defendant had committed the act alleged: the two cases occurred only six weeks apart; the defendant behaved in a similar manner in locating his victims and carrying out both rapes; and in each case he took the victim's automated teller machine card and obtained her personal identification number. (Id. at pp. 423-424.)