In the Matter of James Young v. State

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR. THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals In The Matter Of The Care And Treatment Of James D. Young, Respondent, v. The State, Appellant. Appeal From Pickens County Larry R. Patterson, Circuit Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-421 Submitted September 1, 2010 – Filed September 28, 2010 Withdrawn, Substituted and Refiled November 1, 2010 REVERSED AND REMANDED Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Attorney General. Deborah R. J. Shupe, Assistant Attorney General R. Westmoreland Clarkson, Assistant Attorney General William M. Blitch, Jr., all of Columbia, for Appellant. Appellate Defender LaNelle DuRant, of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: In this civil commitment action, the State of South Carolina appeals the trial court's finding of no probable cause to conduct a full psychological evaluation on James Young, and proceed with a trial on the civil commitment of Young as a sexually violent predator pursuant to Section 44-48-30(1) of the South Carolina Code (Supp. 2009). We reverse, pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Care and Treatment of Chandler v. State, 382 S.C. 250, 256, 676 S.E.2d 676, 679 (2009) (reversing the trial court's finding of no probable cause, as not reasonably supported by the evidence in light of prior similar crimes demonstrating a propensity to engage in criminal sexual conduct as well as failure to complete sex offender treatment). REVERSED AND REMANDED.[1] SHORT, THOMAS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur. [1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.