Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2011-UP-206 - Bing 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

Levi Bing, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondent.


Appeal From the Administrative Law Court
John D. McLeod, Administrative Law Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-206
Submitted May 1, 2011 – Filed May 4, 2011   


AFFIRMED


Jeremy A. Thompson, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Christopher D. Florian, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Levi Bing appeals the Administrative Law Court's (ALC) orders dismissing his inmate grievance appeals.  Bing argues the ALC erred in holding summary dismissal was appropriate because the Department of Corrections' sanctions deprived him of a state-created liberty interest in visitation privileges.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-610(B) (Supp. 2010) (limiting reversal of ALC decision unless the decision is "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 (2004) (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.

HUFF, WILLIAMS, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.


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