Rondeau 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 Robert Rondeau, Respondent, v. South Carolina Department of Corrections, Appellant. Appeal from the Administrative Law Court Deborah Brooks Durden, Administrative Law Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-560 Submitted November 1, 2011 – Filed December 13, 2011 AFFIRMED Michael Laubshire, of Columbia, for Appellant. Robert Rondeau, pro se, of Piedmont. PER CURIAM: The South Carolina Department of Corrections (the Department) appeals the Administrative Law Court's (ALC) order reversing the Department's denial of Robert Rondeau's inmate grievance in which Rondeau objected to the Department's calculation of his sentence. The Department argues the ALC (1) did not properly exercise its jurisdiction and (2) erred by finding the Department incorrectly calculated Rondeau's sentence. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: 1. As to whether the ALC properly exercised its jurisdiction: Al-Shabazz v. State, 338 S.C. 354, 369, 527 S.E.2d 742, 750 (2000) (holding the ALC has jurisdiction when the inmate contends his/her sentence has been erroneously calculated). 2. As to whether the Department incorrectly calculated Rondeau's sentence: S.C. Code Ann. § 24-13-40 (Supp. 2010) (explaining a prisoner must be given full credit for time served prior to trial and sentencing save for two specific exceptions); Allen v. State, 339 S.C. 393, 395, 529 S.E.2d 541, 542 (2000) (explaining section 24-13-40 requires a prisoner to receive credit for all time served unless prisoner was an escapee or prisoner was already serving a sentence for a separate offense). AFFIRMED. HUFF, PIEPER, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur. [1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.