THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals
The State, Respondent,
v.
Richard Kevin Patterson, Appellant.
Appeal From Anderson County
J. C. Buddy Nicholson, Jr., Circuit Court Judge
Opinion No.��� 2003-UP-143
Submitted December 9, 2003 - Filed February 19, 2003
AFFIRMED
Tara� Shurling, of Columbia, for appellant.�
Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, Assistant Attorney General Derrick K. McFarland, of Columbia; Druanne Dykes White, of Anderson; for respondent.�
PER CURIAM:� Richard K. Patterson appeals his convictions for murder and possession of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime, arguing the trial court erred in curtailing cross-examination of the State=s pathologist and in denying his motion for mistrial.�
We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR, and the following authorities:� Issue I:� State v. Burroughs, 328 S.C. 489, 497, 492 S.E.2d 408, 412 (Ct. App. 1997) ("'Hearsay' is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.� [Hearsay] testimony [i]s properly admitted only if it falls within one of the established exceptions to the general rule that hearsay is inadmissible.") (citations omitted); State v. Galloway, 305 S.C. 258, 264, 407 S.E.2d 662, 666 (Ct. App. 1991) (holding trial judge did not err in excluding testimony where "the record plainly reveals it was hearsay and [the defendant] failed to demonstrate it came within any exception to the hearsay rule"; Issue II:� State v. Rosemond, 335 S.C. 593, 596-97, 518 S.E.2d 588, 589-90 (1999) ("The relevance, materiality and admissibility of photographs are matters within the sound discretion of the trial court and a ruling will be disturbed only upon a showing of an abuse of discretion. . . .� If the photograph serves to corroborate testimony, it is not an abuse of discretion to admit it."); State v. Harris, 340 S.C. 59, 63, 530 S.E.2d 626, 628 (2000) ("A mistrial should only be granted when absolutely necessary.� In order to receive a mistrial, the defendant must show error and resulting prejudice.") (internal citation omitted); State v. Kelsey, 502 S.E.2d 63, 69, 331 S.C. 50, 73 (1998) ("The decision to grant or deny a mistrial is within the sound discretion of the trial judge and will not be overturned on appeal absent an abuse of discretion."); State v. Mitchell, 330 S.C. 189, 498 S.E.2d 642 (1998) (stating a defendant cannot acquiesce in an issue at trial and then complain about it on appeal).�
AFFIRMED.�
GOOLSBY, HUFF, and SHULER, JJ., concur.�