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Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-637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.