discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Michael I. Mobley It may, however, be admissible to show . . . the existence of a common scheme or plan . . . or intent."); see also State v. Robinson, 438 S.C. 421 , 435, 882 S.E.2d 883 , 891 (Ct. App. 2023) ("The proponent of prior bad act evidence must demonstrate it has a legitimate purpose, 'i.e., the evidence does something more than prove a person has propensity to commit crimes.'" (quoting Johnson v. State, 433 S.C. 550 , 555, 860 S.E.2d 696 , 699 (Ct. App. 2021))); State v. Perry, 430 S.C. 24 , 44, 842 S.E.2d 654 , 665 (2020) ("The State must show a logical connection between the other crime and the cr…

discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Brooks State v. Adams, 322 S.C. 114 , 470 S.E.2d 366 (1996). “[I]f the court does not clearly perceive the connection between the extraneous criminal transaction and the crime charged, that is, its logical relevancy, the accused should be given the benefit of the doubt, and the evidence should be rejected.” Lyle, 125 S.C. at 417, 118 S.E. at 807.

discussed Cited "see, e.g." the Texas Education Agency and Mike Morath, Commissioner of Education, in His Official Capacity v. Academy of Careers and Technologies, Inc. D/B/A Academy of Careers and Technologies Charter School We at 577, 92 S.Ct. 2701 ); see also Phillips v. Washington granted certiorari. 543 U.S. 955 , 125 S.Ct. 417 , 160 Legal Foundation, 524 U.S. 156, 164 , 118 S.Ct. 1925 , L.Ed.2d 316 (2004). 141 L.Ed.2d 174 (1998).

discussed Cited "see, e.g." Walters v. Corrections Corp. of America See also Gonzales v. City of Castle Rock, 366 F.3d 1093, 1112 (10th Cir.2004) (en banc) (cert. granted, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 417 , 160 L.Ed.2d 316 (2004)) (stating “when the deprivation is caused by established state procedures, the existence of an adequate remedy at state law does not extinguish a procedural due process claim”).