Haigler 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

Derrick Haigler, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2011-200266

Appeal From The Administrative Law Court
Carolyn C. Matthews, Administrative Law Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-497
Submitted August 1, 2012 – Filed August 29, 2012

AFFIRMED

Derrick Haigler, pro se.

Christopher D. Florian, of the South Carolina Department
of Corrections, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed1 pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: Al-Shabazz v. State, 338 S.C. 354, 379, 527 S.E.2d 742, 755 (2000)
(noting an appellate court's review of the Administrative Law Court's (ALC)
decision must be confined to the record); ALC Rule 60(A) ("Unless otherwise

1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
ordered, the party first noticing the appeal shall file an original brief within sixty-
five (65) days after the date of assignment."); ALC Rule 62 ("Upon motion of any
party, or on its own motion, an [ALC] may dismiss an appeal for failure to comply
with any of the rules of procedure for appeals . . . .").

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., and WILLIAMS and PIEPER, JJ., concur.