Dennison v. SCDC

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

Franklin E.
Dennison, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina
Department of Corrections, Respondent.

Appeal from the Administrative Law Court

Carolyn C. Matthews, Administrative Law
Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-535

Submitted November 1, 2011 – Filed
December 2, 2011   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Franklin E. Dennison, pro se.

Christopher D. Florian, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Franklin
E. Dennison, an inmate formerly
incarcerated with the Department of Corrections (the Department), appeals the Administrative Law Court's (ALC) order affirming
the denial of his inmate grievance.  Dennison argues the ALC erred in
determining (1) he was afforded minimal due process in his prison disciplinary
action, and (2) the Department's decision was supported by substantial
evidence.  Because Dennison was released
from the Department's custody on April 1, 2011, we dismiss this appeal as moot.[1]  See Linda Mc Co. v. Shore, 390 S.C. 543, 557, 703 S.E.2d 499, 506 (2010) ("A
case becomes moot when judgment, if rendered, will have no practical legal
effect upon [the] existing controversy. This is true when some event occurs
making it impossible for [the] reviewing [c]ourt to grant effectual
relief." (citations and quotation marks omitted)).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

SHORT, WILLIAMS, and
GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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