What is the test for admitting evidence of prior convictions under Rule 404(b)?

Thus, the four requirements necessary to admit evidence of prior convictions under rule 404(b) are satisfied in this case. However, this does not end our inquiry. We are also required to determine if the district court abused its discretion in finding that the probative value of the evidence outweighed its prejudicial effect. United States v. Hadley, 918 F.2d 848, 852 (9th Cir.1990). As explained immediately above, the evidence was highly probative on the issues of knowledge and intent. Moreover, while the evidence was obviously prejudicial, the district court took care to limit its effect on the jury. The prosecution was only allowed to introduce evidence of two convictions and a limiting instruction was provided by the trial judge. Under these circumstances we can not say that the probative value of the prior conviction evidence was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.