Kollyns v. State

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

Kris Kollyns,       
Appellant,

v.

State of South Carolina,       
Respondent.

Appeal From Jasper County

Jackson V. Gregory, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-023

Submitted November 19, 2003 – Filed
January 15, 2004

AFFIRMED

Assistant Appellate Defender Eleanor D. Cleary, of Columbia,
for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Allen Bullard, all
of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Kris Kollyns appeals the dismissal
of his petition for habeas corpus.  We affirm. [1]

FACTS

Kollyns, an inmate at McCormick Correctional Institution,
filed a petition for habeas corpus in the circuit court seeking the return of
20 good time days allegedly taken from him at a South Carolina Department of
Corrections minor disciplinary hearing.  It is unclear from the petition whether
Kollyns actually lost good time credits or was barred from earning them for
a period of time.  In his petition, Kollyns asserts he appealed the department’s
ruling to the Administrative Law Judge Division (ALJD), but that the ALJD dismissed
his appeal pursuant to an en banc order regarding inmate appeals.  In its return,
the State moved to dismiss Kollyns’ petition noting, among other things, the
only proper inquiry in a habeas corpus action is the legality of the petitioner’s
present detention.  After a hearing, the circuit court dismissed the petition
on the grounds argued in the State’s return. 

LAW/ANALYSIS

We first note the circuit court properly dismissed
Kollyns’ petition because the relief he sought, the return of good time credits,
was outside the scope of an action for habeas corpus.  Gibson v. State,
329 S.C. 37, 40, 495 S.E.2d 426, 427 (1998) (noting the purpose of habeas corpus
is to determine the legality of the petitioner’s present detention and the only
relief that can be granted is release from custody).

On appeal, Kollyns for the first time seeks a remand
of his case to the ALJD.  He claims the ALJD has jurisdiction over his appeal
from the department of corrections pursuant to Al-Shabazz v. State, 338
S.C. 354, 527 S.E.2d 742 (1999).  However, because this issue was never raised
to the circuit court it is not proper for our review.  State v. McKnight,
352 S.C. 635, 646, 576 S.E.2d 168, 174 (issue must be raised to and ruled on
by the trial court to be preserved for appellate review), cert. denied,
124 S. Ct. 101 (2003). 

For the reasons set forth above, Kollyns’
appeal is

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, STILWELL, and BEATTY, JJ., concur.  

[1]
       We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.