Rondeau 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

Robert Rondeau, Respondent,

v.

South Carolina
Department of Corrections, Appellant.

Appeal from the Administrative Law Court

Deborah Brooks Durden, Administrative Law Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2011-UP-560 

Submitted November 1, 2011 – Filed
December 13, 2011

AFFIRMED

Michael Laubshire, of Columbia, for
Appellant.

Robert Rondeau, pro se, of Piedmont.

PER CURIAM:  The South Carolina Department of
Corrections (the Department) appeals the Administrative Law Court's (ALC) order
reversing the Department's denial of Robert Rondeau's inmate grievance in which
Rondeau objected to the Department's calculation of his sentence.  The
Department argues the ALC (1) did not properly exercise its jurisdiction and
(2) erred by finding the Department incorrectly calculated Rondeau's sentence.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1. As to whether
the ALC properly exercised its jurisdiction:  Al-Shabazz v. State, 338
S.C. 354, 369, 527 S.E.2d 742, 750 (2000) (holding the ALC has jurisdiction
when the inmate contends his/her sentence has been erroneously calculated).

2. As to
whether the Department incorrectly calculated Rondeau's sentence:  S.C. Code
Ann. § 24-13-40 (Supp. 2010) (explaining a prisoner must be given full credit
for time served prior to trial and sentencing save for two specific
exceptions); Allen v. State, 339 S.C. 393, 395, 529 S.E.2d 541, 542
(2000) (explaining section 24-13-40 requires a prisoner to receive credit for
all time served unless prisoner was an escapee or prisoner was already serving
a sentence for a separate offense).

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, PIEPER,
and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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