Does the trial court abuse its discretion, within the confines of substantive and procedural due process in the U.S. Constitution's 6th and 14th Amendment, by the admission of evidence of irrelevant collateral crimes or acts?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED The State Trial Court denied a timely motion for severance of the charges from separate incidents. And the Trial Court allowed the State Attorney to present evidence of unproven, unrelated crimes without relevance to each other. This all only served to attack the character of the Petitioner and unfairly bolster the State’s case. Does the trial court abuse its discretion, within the confines of substantive and procedural due process in the U.S. Constitution’s 6* and 14th Amendment, by the admission of evidence of irrelevant collateral crimes or acts? The State was allowed to acquire Petitioner’s cellular phone data without a warrant and permitted, over objection, to use it against him at trial. Does a trial court abuse its discretion, within the confines of procedural due process in the U.S. Constitution’s 6 and 14th Amendment, by impermissibly admitting evidence of cellular telephone data acquired without issuance of a warrant? ii