Cassady v. SCDPPP

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 Rudy Cassady, Appellant, v. South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, Respondent. Appeal from the Administrative Law Court John D. McLeod, Administrative Law Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-534 Submitted November 1, 2011 – Filed December 2, 2011 AFFIRMED Rudy Cassady, pro se. Tommy Evans, Jr., of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Rudy Cassady appeals the Administrative Law Court's affirmance of the determination of the Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services (the Department) that he is permanently ineligible for parole. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. McKay, 300 S.C. 113, 115, 386 S.E.2d 623, 623-24 (1989) ("[T]he authority to determine, for purposes of parole eligibility under § 24-21-640, whether multiple violent crimes have been committed pursuant to one continuous course of conduct is statutorily vested in the [Department]."); Bryant v. State, 384 S.C. 525, 533, 683 S.E.2d 280, 284 (2009) (holding three separate crimes committed on different days and involving different victims "were not inextricably connected and did not share an immediate temporal proximity [and t]hus . . . may not, as a matter of law, be considered 'one offense'"). AFFIRMED. SHORT, WILLIAMS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur. [1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.