Wright 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

Allen Wright, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina Department
of Corrections, Respondent.

Appeal from the Administrative Law Court

Deborah Brooks Durden, Administrative Law
Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-294 

Submitted April 2, 2012 – Filed May 16,
2012

AFFIRMED

Allen Wright, pro se.

Christopher D. Florian, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Allen Wright appeals the dismissal of his inmate disciplinary
action by the Administrative Law Court (ALC), arguing the ALC's summary dismissal
was in error.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Code
Ann. § 1-23-610(B) (Supp. 2011) (limiting reversal of the ALC's decision unless
"in violation of constitutional or statutory provisions; . . . affected by
other error of law; . . . [or] arbitrary or capricious or characterized by
abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion"); Slezak
v. S.C. Dep't of Corr., 361 S.C. 327, 331, 605 S.E.2d 506, 508 (2005)
(holding the ALC has the discretion to summarily dismiss inmate grievance
appeals that do "not implicate a state-created liberty or property
interest"); Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484 (1995)
("[State-created liberty] interests will be generally limited to freedom
from restraint which . . . imposes atypical and significant hardship on the
inmate in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life.").

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., HUFF and SHORT,
JJ., concur.

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