Boozer v. Thompson

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE
CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING
EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

Karen Boozer and George Boozer, Respondents,

v.

Pasquanna Jefferies and Branson Thompson, Defendants,

Of whom Branson Thompson is the Appellant.

In the interest of a minor under the age of eighteen.

Appellate Case No. 2018-000658

Appeal From Greenville County
Rochelle Y. Conits, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-429
Submitted October 18, 2018 – Filed November 19, 2018

AFFIRMED

Kimberly Yancey Brooks, of Kimberly Y. Brooks,
Attorney at Law, of Greenville; and Branson Thompson,
pro se, for Appellant.

Catherine C. Christophillis, of Christophillis & Gallivan,
P.A., of Greenville, for Respondents.
Nela Laughridge, of Greenville, for the Guardian ad
Litem.

PER CURIAM: Branson Thompson appeals from the family court's final order
terminating his parental rights to his minor child. See S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-2570
(Supp. 2017). Upon a thorough review of the record and the family court's
findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Ex parte Cauthen, 291 S.C.
465, 354 S.E.2d 381 (1987), we find no meritorious issues warrant briefing.
Accordingly, we affirm the family court's ruling and relieve Thompson's counsel.

AFFIRMED.1

LOCKEMY, C.J., and THOMAS and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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