SCDSS v. Chasity R.

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

South Carolina Department
of Social Services, Respondent,

v.

Chasity R., et. al., of
whom Chasity R. is Appellant.

In
the interest of: S.A.G., DOB 10/31/99; F.G., DOB 11/9/03; and P.G., DOB
09/10/06, all minor children under the age of eighteen years.

Appeal From Aiken County

Deborah Neese, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-024

Submitted January 2, 2009 – Filed January 13, 2009   

AFFIRMED

Noel
Ingram, of Augusta, Georgia, and Susan Reimer, for Appellant.

Dennis
Gmerek, for Respondent.

Michael
Taylor, for Guardian Ad Litem.

PER
CURIAM:  Chasity R. appeals the
termination of her parental rights to S.A.G., F.G., and P.G.  See S.C. Code Ann. § 20-7-1572 (Supp. 2007).[1]  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 counsel. 

AFFIRMED.[2]

WILLIAMS, PIEPER, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

[1] Effective June 16, 2008, the General Assembly amended
the Code of Laws of South Carolina by adding Title 63, the South Carolina
Children’s Code, and transferring all provisions of Title 20, Chapter 7 to
Title 63.  See Act No. 361, 2008 S.C. Acts 3623 (stating “the transfer
and reorganization of the code provisions in this act are technical . . . and
are not intended to be substantive”).  Because Title 63 has not yet been bound,
all citations to the statute refer to Title 20.

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