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
In The Court of Appeals
Elouise Gardner, Appellant,
Letitia Gladney, Respondent.
Berry L. Mobley, Family Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-564
Submitted October 3, 2005 – Filed October 25,2005
William W. Wheeler, III, of Bishopville, for Appellant.
John D. Elliott, of
Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Elouise Gardner appeals from the family court’s denial of her request for visitation with her two grandsons. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220, SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 20-7-420 (33) (Supp. 2004) (stating the family court has jurisdiction to order visitation for grandparents “upon a written finding that the visitation rights would be in the best interests of the child and would not interfere with the parent/child relationship”); Camburn v. Smith, 355 S.C. 574, 580, 586 S.E.2d 565, 568 (2003) (stating that where a parent is fit, before visitation can be awarded to a grandparent over the parent’s objection “there must be evidence of compelling circumstances to overcome the presumption that the parental decision is in the child’s best interests”).
ANDERSON, HUFF, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.
 We decide this case without oral arguments pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.