In the Matter of the Care and Treatment of Ricky H. Pitts

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR. THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals In the Matter of the Care and Treatment of Ricky H. Pitts, Appellant. Appeal from Pickens County Edward W. Miller, Circuit Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-637 Submitted November 3, 2008 – Filed November 13, 2008 AFFIRMED Appellate Defender LaNelle C. DuRant, of Columbia, for Appellant. 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, all of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Ricky H. Pitts appeals his commitment to the South Carolina Department of Mental Health as a sexually violent predator. Pitts argues the trial court erred by overruling his objection to the solicitor’s comments during closing argument and by failing to issue a curative instruction to the jury. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Navy, 370 S.C. 398, 412, 635 S.E.2d 549, 556 (Ct. App. 2006) (holding the trial court is given broad discretion in determining the appropriateness of a solicitor’s closing argument and this court will not disturb the trial court’s ruling absent an abuse of discretion); State v. Sierra, 337 S.C. 368, 373, 523 S.E.2d 187, 189 (Ct. App. 1999) (holding an appellant must prove both an abuse of discretion and resulting prejudice to warrant reversal). AFFIRMED. HEARN, C.J., SHORT and KONDUROS, JJ., concur. [1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.