SC Administrative Law Court Decisions

In the above-captioned matter, Appellant Daniel Jones appeals of the decision of Respondent South Carolina Department of Corrections (Department) to deny his grievance concerning money deducted from his prison account. Based upon the record presented in this appeal, I find that the Department’s decision to deny Appellant’s grievance must be affirmed.

BACKGROUND

In Step 1 and Step 2 Inmate Grievance Forms, submitted on April 19, 2004, and June 14, 2004, respectively, and identified as grievance number McCI 0140-04, Appellant contends that the Department deducted more funds from his prison account than authorized by an Order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding the payment of certain filing fees he owes to the Court. In response to Appellant’s grievance, the Department found that the amounts deducted from his account were proper, as the amounts were deductions for filing fees for Appellant’s several cases before the United States District Court and deductions for several medical co-payments he owes the state. Therefore, by a final agency decision dated October 4, 2004, the Department denied Appellant’s grievance. Appellant now appeals that denial before this Court.

DISCUSSION

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). 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 sufficiently supported by the 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. Accordingly, the Department’s decision in this matter should be affirmed.

ORDER

For the reasons set forth above,

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

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________________

JOHN D. GEATHERS

Administrative Law Judge

1205 Pendleton Street, Suite 224

Columbia, South Carolina 29201-3731

August 11, 2005

Columbia, South Carolina