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 Appeal from the Administrative Law Court Deborah Brooks Durden, Administrative Law Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-294 Submitted April 2, 2012 – Filed May 16, 2012 AFFIRMED Allen Wright, pro se.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.