SCDSS v. Garrett

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE

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 SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

Charleston County Department of Social Services,
Respondent,

v.

Moses Garrett and Pricilla Chandler, Defendants,

of whom Moses Garrett is Appellant.

IN THE INTEREST OF:  Charlene Garrett.

Appeal From Charleston County

 Paul W. Garfinkel, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2005-UP-633

Submitted December 1, 2005 – Filed December 13, 2005

AFFIRMED

John Patrick Hayes and Erick Brock, both of Charleston, for Appellant.

Frampton  Durban, Jr., of North Charleston, for Respondent.

Amanda Bethea Keaveny, of Charleston, for Guardian Ad Litem.

PER CURIAM: This appeal arises from a contested Permanency Planning Hearing concerning the removal of Charlene Garrett, the minor child, from the home of Moses Garrett, the father.  The family court found that custody of Charlene should remain with DSS due to physical abuse and that the removal was in her best interest.  Additionally, the family court ordered DSS to investigate other allegations of abuse concerning the punishment of Charlene and her sister, Ieesha Garrett, by placing them outside in the cold weather for three
hours.

After a thorough review of the record pursuant to Ex Parte Cauthen, 291 S.C. 465, 354 S.E.2d 381 (1987) and SCDSS v. Frederick Downer, Sr., S.C.Sup.Ct. Order dated February 2, 2005 (expanding the procedure set forth in Cauthen to situations where an indigent person appeals from an order imposing other measures short of termination of parental rights, such as removal, based on child abuse and neglect), we affirm[1] the family court’s ruling and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.

AFFIRMED.

HEARN, C.J., and HUFF and BEATTY, JJ., concur

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