Opinion ID: 1285642
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Clear and convincing proof

Text: Appellant contends there is not clear and convincing evidence he committed the cab driver murder. See State v. Beck, 342 S.C. 129, 536 S.E.2d 679 (2000) (bad act must be proved by clear and convincing evidence to be admissible). As we recently stated, the trial judge's ruling admitting bad act evidence will be upheld on appeal if it is supported by any evidence. State v. Wilson, 345 S.C. 1, 545 S.E.2d 827 (2001). This Court does not conduct a de novo review to determine if the evidence is clear and convincing. Id. Here, there is evidence appellant was in possession of the murder weapon at the time of the cab driver shooting and the cab driver gave a description generally matching appellant. Further, in his letter, appellant told inmate Virgil Howard about his licks involving a cab down by the mall last month ( i.e. February) and sending someone to the essence. McDonald was the only cab driver murdered between January and March of 1996. This evidence is sufficient to uphold the trial judge's ruling.