In the Matter of Dewey Chadwick

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 Dewey
Chadwick, Appellant.
Appellate Case No. 2014-002139
Appeal From Anderson County
Alexander S. Macaulay, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-365
Submitted May 1, 2016 – Filed July 20, 2016
AFFIRMED
Appellate Defender Lara Mary Caudy, of Columbia, for
Appellant.
Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Senior
Assistant Deputy Attorney General Deborah R.J. Shupe,
both of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Douglas, 369 S.C. 424, 429, 632 S.E.2d 845, 847-48 (2006)
("The admission or exclusion of evidence is a matter addressed to the sound
discretion of the trial court and its ruling will not be disturbed in the absence of a
manifest abuse of discretion accompanied by probable prejudice."); id. at 429-30,
632 S.E.2d at 848 ("An abuse of discretion occurs when the conclusions of the trial
court either lack evidentiary support or are controlled by an error of law."); State v.
Adams, 354 S.C. 361, 378, 580 S.E.2d 785, 794 (Ct. App. 2003) ("A trial [court]'s
decision regarding the comparative probative value and prejudicial effect of
evidence should be reversed only in exceptional circumstances.").
AFFIRMED.1
LOCKEMY, C.J., and WILLIAMS and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.