ORDERS:
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
This matter is before the Administrative Law Judge Division ("Division") pursuant to Appellant's Notice of Appeal filed May 4, 2000.
In an opinion filed April 19, 2000, the South Carolina Supreme Court remanded Appellant's case to Respondent pursuant to Al-Shabazz v. State, 338 S.C. 354, 527 S.E.2d 742 (2000). Appellant then filed a Notice of Appeal with the Division.
The Division only has jurisdiction over inmate appeals as a result of the Al-Shabazz opinion. The Division, therefore, only has
jurisdiction to hear non-collateral or administrative matters in post-conviction relief actions filed after February 14, 2000, in final
decisions rendered by Respondent after February 14, 2000, and in cases pending in a circuit court or the South Carolina Supreme
Court on February 14, 2000.
In this case, Appellant never filed a grievance with Respondent. Respondent, therefore, never issued a final decision. Because
Respondent never issued a final decision in this case, the Division has no jurisdiction to hear this appeal.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this appeal is dismissed without prejudice to allow Appellant to file an Inmate Grievance
within thirty (30) days of the date of this order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Appellant's Motion for Default filed June 30, 2000, is denied.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
__________________________________
MARVIN F. KITTRELL
Chief Administrative Law Judge
August 15, 2000
Columbia, South Carolina
APPEAL RIGHTS
You are entitled to appeal this final order of the Administrative Law Judge Division by filing a petition for judicial review in circuit
court and serving such petition on opposing parties within thirty (30) days after receipt of this order. S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-610
(Supp. 1999). The petition may be filed in any circuit court as long as the chosen forum is neither arbitrary nor unreasonable, and
provided that no statute controls venue in a particular type of case. The review of the administrative law judge's order must be
confined to the record. The reviewing tribunal may affirm the decision or remand the case for further proceedings; or it may reverse or
modify the decision if the substantive rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced because the finding, conclusion, or decision is: (a) in
violation of constitutional or statutory provisions; (b) in excess of the statutory authority of the agency; (c) made upon unlawful
procedure; (d) affected by other error of law; (e) clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative and substantial evidence on the
whole record; or (f) arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion. |