SCDSS v. Salinas

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

South Carolina Department of Social Services,
Respondent,

v.

Roberto Salinas and Maria Dominguez, Defendants,

Of Whom Robert Salinas is the Appellant.

In the interest of minors under the age of eighteen.

Appellate Case No. 2013-001344

Appeal From Aiken County
Dale Moore Gable, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2015-UP-292
Submitted May 1, 2015 – Filed June 17, 2015

AFFIRMED

Charles C. Mayers, of Augusta, Georgia, for Appellant.

Amanda F. Whittle, of the South Carolina Department of
Social Services, of Aiken, for Respondent.
Amy Shumpert, of Nance, McCants & Massey, of Aiken,
for the Guardian ad Litem.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: Simmons v. Simmons, 392 S.C. 412, 414, 709 S.E.2d 666, 667 (2011)
("In appeals from the family court, [an appellate court] reviews factual and legal
issues de novo."); Lewis v. Lewis, 392 S.C. 381, 385, 709 S.E.2d 650, 651-52
(2011) (providing an appellate court is not required to ignore the fact that the
family court, who saw and heard the witnesses, was in a better position to evaluate
their credibility and assign comparative weight to their testimony); S.C. Code Ann.
§ 63-7-1940(A)(1)(b) (Supp. 2014) (requiring the family court to order an
accused's name be entered into the Central Registry of Child Abuse and Neglect
when the court finds by a preponderance of evidence the accused sexually abused
the victim); S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-20(19) (2010) (defining "preponderance of
evidence" as evidence that is "more convincing as to its truth than the evidence in
opposition"); Satcher v. Satcher, 351 S.C. 477, 483, 570 S.E.2d 535, 538 (Ct. App.
2002) (holding clear and convincing evidence is more than a mere preponderance
of evidence).

AFFIRMED.1

THOMAS, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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