History
  • No items yet
midpage
748 S.E.2d 236
S.C. Ct. App.
2013
Read the full case

Background

  • Appellant Darren Gerome Scott was convicted of three counts of a lewd act upon a child and one count of second-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor.
  • The State introduced 404(b) bad-act witnesses to prove a common scheme or plan, over Appellant's objection that the acts were too remote and dissimilar.
  • Three Victims (1–3) and Victim 4 (Appellant’s eight-year-old daughter) were involved in abuse allegations spanning 1998–2008; two additional witnesses testified about abuse in 1987 when they were eight.
  • The trial court admitted the 404(b) testimony after finding substantial similarity and balance against unfair prejudice; the judge planned to reassess before the witnesses testified.
  • Appellant contends the bad-act evidence was not sufficiently similar and was too remote in time to be probative.
  • Convictions and consecutive sentences totaled 90, 90, 90, and 110 months in prison.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether 404(b) witnesses were admissible for common scheme. Scott; argues insufficient similarity to charged crimes. Scott; arguing remoteness and prejudice reduce probative value. Yes; evidence showed a close degree of similarity sufficient for common scheme.
Whether temporal remoteness and 403 balancing invalidated admission. State contends remoteness does not require exclusion and probative value remains high. Scott argues the time gap diminishes probative value and increases prejudice. No; remoteness did not render evidence inadmissible; probative value outweighed prejudice.

Key Cases Cited

  • State v. Clasby, 385 S.C. 148 (2009) (establishes framework for Rule 404(b) admissibility and similarity)
  • Wallace v. State, 384 S.C. 428 (2009) (close degree of similarity standard for common scheme)
  • State v. Taylor, 399 S.C. 51 (Ct.App. 2012) (set of factors for assessing similarity in 404(b))
  • State v. Gillian, 373 S.C. 601 (2007) (Rule 403 balancing framework for prejudice vs. probative value)
  • State v. Hallman, 298 S.C. 172 (1989) (remoteness acceptable for common-scheme proof)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Scott
Court Name: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Date Published: Aug 14, 2013
Citations: 748 S.E.2d 236; 405 S.C. 489; 2013 S.C. App. LEXIS 204; 2013 WL 4082326; Appellate Case No. 2011-190428; No. 5164
Docket Number: Appellate Case No. 2011-190428; No. 5164
Court Abbreviation: S.C. Ct. App.
Log In