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Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-421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Withdrawn, Substituted and Refiled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.