Bing 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

Levi Bing, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina Department
of Corrections, Respondent.

Appeal From the Administrative Law Court

John D. McLeod, Administrative Law Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-206

Submitted May 1, 2011 – Filed May 4, 2011   

AFFIRMED

Jeremy A. Thompson, of Columbia, for
Appellant.

Christopher D. Florian, of Columbia, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Levi
Bing appeals the Administrative Law Court's (ALC) orders dismissing his inmate
grievance appeals.  Bing argues the ALC erred in holding summary dismissal was
appropriate because the Department of Corrections' sanctions deprived him of a
state-created liberty interest in visitation privileges.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Code
Ann. § 1-23-610(B) (Supp. 2010) (limiting reversal of ALC decision unless the
decision is "in violation of constitutional or statutory provisions; . . .
affected by other error of law; . . . [or] arbitrary or capricious or
characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of
discretion"); Slezak v. S.C. Dep't of Corr., 361 S.C. 327, 331, 605
S.E.2d 506, 508 (2004) (holding the ALC has the discretion to summarily dismiss
inmate grievance appeals that do "not implicate a state-created liberty or
property interest"); Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484 (1995) ("[State-created
liberty] interests will be generally limited to freedom from restraint which .
. . imposes atypical and significant hardship on the inmate in relation to the
ordinary incidents of prison life.").

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, WILLIAMS, and
THOMAS, JJ., concur.

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