Turner 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

Lexie James Turner, Appellant,

v.

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

Appellate Case No. 2017-000992

Appeal From The Administrative Law Court
Deborah Brooks Durden, Administrative Law Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-181
Submitted March 1, 2018 – Filed May 2, 2018

AFFIRMED

Lexie James Turner, pro se.

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

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-610(B) (Supp. 2017) ("The court of
appeals . . . may reverse [an Administrative Law Court's (ALC)] decision if the
substantive rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced because the finding,
conclusion, or decision is . . . clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative,
and substantial evidence on the whole record . . . ."); SCALC Rule 59 ("The notice
of appeal from the final decision to be heard by the [ALC] shall be filed with the
[c]ourt and a copy served on each party, including the agency, within thirty (30)
days of receipt of the decision from which the appeal is taken."); SCALC Rule 62
("Upon motion of any party, or on its own motion, an Administrative Law Judge
may dismiss an appeal or resolve the appeal adversely to the offending party for
failure to comply with any of the rules of procedure for appeals, including the
failure to comply with any of the time limits provided by this section . . . .");
Al-Shabazz v. State, 338 S.C. 354, 369, 527 S.E.2d 742, 750 (2000) ("[A]n inmate
may seek judicial review of [the agency's] final decision in an administrative
manner under the [Administrative Procedures Act (APA)]. Placing review of these
cases within the ambit of the APA will ensure that an inmate receives due process,
which consists of notice, a hearing, and judicial review."); Barton v. S.C. Dep't of
Prob., Parole and Pardon Servs., 404 S.C. 395, 401, 745 S.E.2d 110, 113 (2013)
("In determining whether the ALC's decision was supported by substantial
evidence, this [c]ourt need only find, looking at the entire record on appeal,
evidence from which reasonable minds could reach the same conclusion that the
ALC reached.").

AFFIRMED.1

SHORT, THOMAS, and HILL, JJ., concur.

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