Cassady v. SCDPPP

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

Rudy Cassady, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina
Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, Respondent.

Appeal from the Administrative Law Court

John D. McLeod, Administrative Law Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-534

Submitted November 1, 2011 – Filed December
2, 2011   

AFFIRMED

Rudy Cassady, pro se.

Tommy Evans, Jr., of Columbia, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Rudy Cassady appeals the Administrative
Law Court's affirmance of the determination of the Department of Probation, Parole
and Pardon Services (the Department) that he is permanently ineligible for
parole.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and
the following authorities: State v.
McKay, 300 S.C. 113, 115, 386 S.E.2d
623, 623-24 (1989) ("[T]he authority to determine, for purposes of parole
eligibility under § 24-21-640, whether multiple violent crimes have been
committed pursuant to one continuous course of conduct is statutorily vested in
the [Department]."); Bryant v. State, 384 S.C. 525, 533, 683 S.E.2d
280, 284 (2009) (holding three separate crimes committed on different days and
involving different victims "were not inextricably connected and did not
share an immediate temporal proximity [and t]hus . . . may not, as a matter of
law, be considered 'one offense'"). 

AFFIRMED.

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

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