With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the discretion of the trial judge and will not be reversed on appeal unless wholly unsupported by the evidence.”); id. ("[I]n reviewing the trial judge's disqualification of prospective jurors, the responses of a challenged juror must be examined in light of the entire voir dire.”). 14 . See State v. Copeland, 321 S.C. 318, 324, 468 S.E.2d 620, 624 (1996) (“The trial court has broad discretion when dealing with the propriety of the solicitor’s argument, including the question of whether to grant a defendant’s mistrial motion.”). 15 . See In re McCracken, 346 S.C. 87, 93, 551 S.E.2d 235, 238-39 (2001) (stating a contemporaneous objection is required to preserve issues regarding a closing argument for review); State v. Moultrie, 316 S.C. 547, 555-56, 451 S.E.2d 34, 39 (Ct.App.1994) (<HOLDING>). 16 . See State v. Cooper, 334 S.C. 540, 554,

A: holding that an objection raised in a motion to suppress evidence preserves the issue for appeal despite the lack of further objection at trial
B: holding the lack of a contemporaneous objection could not be salvaged by a motion for a mistrial
C: holding a contemporaneous objection is required to preserve an issue for appellate review
D: holding mistrial unwarranted where contemporaneous objection was made to single mention of insurance and court gave cautionary instruction
B.