South Carolina              
Administrative Law Court
Edgar A. Brown building 1205 Pendleton St., Suite 224 Columbia, SC 29201 Voice: (803) 734-0550

SC Administrative Law Court Decisions

James Mitchell #252388 vs. SCDOR

South Carolina Department of Corrections

James Mitchell #252388

South Carolina Department of Corrections




In the above-captioned matter, Appellant James Mitchell appeals of the decision of Respondent South Carolina Department of Corrections (Department) in refusing to process his grievance concerning his request to be transferred to Kershaw Correctional Institution. Based upon the record presented in this appeal, I find that the Department’s decision to reject Appellant’s grievance must be affirmed.


In Step 1 Inmate Grievance Form dated November 30, 2006, Appellant requests the Department to transfer him to Kershaw Correctional Institution. In response to Appellant’s grievance, the Department determined that Administrative transfers are non-grievable issues. Further, Appellant’s custody status was changed on November 7, 2006. While Appellant’s Step 1 Grievance Form was dated November 29, 2006, it was not actually submitted to grievance officials until November 30, 2006; thus, it was not timely filed within fifteen days of the alleged action as required by Department policy. Therefore, on November 30, 2006, the Department returned Appellant’s Step 1 Grievance Form to him unprocessed. Appellant now appeals that denial before this Court.


This appeal is before this Court pursuant to Al-Shabazz v. State, 338 S.C. 354, 527 S.E.2d 742 (2000), Sullivan v. South Carolina Department of Corrections, 355 S.C. 437, 586 S.E.2d 124 (2003), and Slezak v. South Carolina Department of Corrections, 361 S.C. 327, 605 S.E.2d 506 (2004). Because Appellant failed to file his grievance within the time period mandated under SCDC Policy Number GA-01.12, Paragraph 13.1, or the exceptions set forth in Paragraph 13.9, this Court can not grant or deny Appellant any relief as he has not complied with Department policy regarding the processing of grievances. Moreover, to the extent that the relief Appellant seeks in this matter is to be transferred to another institution of his choice, this Court has no authority to intervene in internal Department matters so as to grant such relief.

Having fully considered the documents filed by Appellant and the Department and having closely reviewed the record in this matter, I find that the Department’s decision to deny Appellant’s grievance was the result of a routine and good-faith exercise of the Department’s administrative responsibilities that is supported by sufficient evidence in the record. Further, there is nothing in the record to suggest that the Department’s decision was arbitrary, capricious, or the result of personal bias or prejudice.


For the reasons set forth above,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Department’s decision to deny Appellant’s grievance is AFFIRMED.




Administrative Law Judge

1205 Pendleton Street, Suite 224

Columbia, South Carolina 29201-3731

April 10, 2007

Columbia, South Carolina


Brown Bldg.






Copyright © 2024 South Carolina Administrative Law Court