Taylor 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

Dion Taylor, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2017-001061

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

Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-376
Submitted September 1, 2018 – Filed October 10, 2018

APPEAL DISMISSED

Dion Taylor, of North Charleston, pro se.

Kensey Collins, of the South Carolina Department of
Corrections, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Dion Taylor appeals the administrative law court's order
affirming the Department of Corrections' calculation and application of his credit
for time served. After filing the appeal, Taylor submitted a letter to the court
indicating he had been released from prison. Because this court cannot provide
effectual relief regarding Taylor's credit for time served, we dismiss the appeal as
moot. See Sloan v. Friends of the Hunley, Inc., 369 S.C. 20, 25, 630 S.E.2d 474,
477 (2006) ("Generally, this [c]ourt only considers cases presenting a justiciable
controversy."); id. at 26, 630 S.E.2d at 477 ("A moot case exists whe[n] a
judgment rendered by the court will have no practical legal effect upon an existing
controversy because an intervening event renders any grant of effectual relief
impossible for the reviewing court."); Curtis v. State, 345 S.C. 557, 568, 549
S.E.2d 591, 596 (2001) ("[A]n appellate court can take jurisdiction, despite
mootness, if the issue raised is capable of repetition but evading review."); Sloan,
369 S.C. at 27, 630 S.E.2d at 478 ("However, the action must be one [that] will
truly evade review [for the mootness exception to apply].").

APPEAL DISMISSED.1

KONDUROS, MCDONALD, and HILL, JJ., concur.

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