Moore v. SCDPPPS

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

Tony Moore, Jr., #188313, Appellant,

v.

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

Appellate Case No. 2016-000261

Appeal From The Administrative Law Court
S. Phillip Lenski, Administrative Law Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-257
Submitted April 2, 2018 – Filed June 13, 2018

AFFIRMED

Joshua Snow Kendrick, of Greenville, and Christopher
Shannon Leonard, of Columbia, both of Kendrick &
Leonard, P.C., for Appellant.

Tommy Evans, Jr., of Columbia, of South Carolina
Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: See S.C. Code Ann. § 24-21-640 (Supp. 2017) (The department "must
not grant parole nor is parole authorized to any prisoner serving a sentence for a
second or subsequent conviction, following a separate sentencing for a prior
conviction, for violent crimes as defined in Section 16-1-60."); Furtick v. S.C.
Dep't of Prob., Parole & Pardon Servs., 352 S.C. 594, 598, 576 S.E.2d 146, 149
(2003) ("[T]he permanent denial of parole eligibility implicates a liberty interest
sufficient to require at least minimal due process."); State v. Green, 412 S.C. 65,
84, 770 S.E.2d 424, 434 (Ct. App. 2015) (finding life imprisonment without parole
for a second armed robbery conviction pursuant to a recidivist statute was not cruel
and unusual punishment for a defendant who was an adult when he committed the
second offense but a juvenile when he committed the first); id. at 87, 770 S.E.2d at
436 ("Miller's holding was based, in part, on the 'recklessness, impulsivity, and
heedless risk-taking' of children; however, because Green was not a juvenile at the
time he committed the current armed robbery, the policy considerations from
Miller are inapplicable." (quoting Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 471 (2012))).

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, GEATHERS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

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