Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2011-MO-036 - Chisolm 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 Supreme Court

Jeromy Chisolm, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondent.


Appeal From Administrative Law Court
 Ralph K. Anderson, III, Circuit Court Judge


Memorandum Opinion No. 2011-MO-036
Submitted December 1, 2011 – Filed December 12, 2011


AFFIRMED


Jeromy Chisolm, pro se, Appellant.

Christopher D. Florian, of S.C. Dept. of Corrections, of Columbia, for Respondent.


PER CURIAM:  Jeromy Chisolm was charged with fighting without a weapon after an altercation with another inmate after which he was transferred to another facility.  He had a grievance hearing and was found guilty. During the month of the disciplinary action, Chisolm was not allowed to earn good time credits.  Chisolm appealed to the Administrative Law Court's (ALC) and the ALC dismissed his appeal for lack of jurisdiction under Section 1-23-600(D) of the South Carolina Code (Supp. 2010).

Chisolm contends that because his argument on appeal addresses his denial of due process in his grievance hearing and not his failure to earn good time credits, section 1-23-600(D) does not apply and he is entitled to an appeal.  We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-600(D) (Supp. 2010) ("An administrative law judge shall not hear an appeal from an inmate in the custody of the Department of Corrections involving the loss of the opportunity to earn sentence-related credits." (emphasis added)); Triska v. Dept. of Health & Envtl. Control, 292 S.C. 190, 194, 355 S.E.2d 531, 533 (1987) (noting that state administrative agencies "can only exercise those powers which have been conferred upon it by the South Carolina General Assembly"); Crowe v. Leeke, 273 S.C. 763, 764, 259 S.E.2d 614, 615 (1979) (holding that a transfer within the prison system is not subject to judicial review absent a showing that the prison officials "acted arbitrarily, capriciously or from personal bias or prejudice").   

AFFIRMED.

TOAL, C.J., PLEICONES, BEATTY, KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ., concur.