I agree with the majority that any error that might have occurred here was harmless and therefore reach the same result. However, for precisely the reason of this harmlessness, I believe it is unnecessary to address whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that evidence of defendant's previous criminal conduct was admissible under MRE 404(b). Such error is clearly implied by reference to People v. Denson , 500 Mich. 385 , 902 N.W.2d 306 (2017), a decision of this Court in which there was both a 404(b) violation and the absence of harmless error.

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 26, 2018 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE that part of the Court of Appeals opinion holding that evidence of the 2011 robbery served the proper purpose of showing intent, MRE 404(b)(1). People v. Denson , 500 Mich. 385 , 902 N.W.2d 306 (2017). We AFFIRM, however, the Court of Appeals holding that any error in this regard was harmless in light of the overwhelming untainted evidence.