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

Kevin Sanders #219280 vs. SCDOC

South Carolina Department of Corrections

Kevin Sanders #219280

South Carolina Department of Corrections





This matter comes before the Administrative Law Judge Division (Division) pursuant to the appeal of Kevin Sanders, an inmate incarcerated with the Department of Corrections (Department). On January 18, 2000, the Appellant was convicted of violating SCDC Disciplinary Code 2.9, Sexual Misconduct, at Kershaw Correctional Institution. As a result of his conviction, the Appellant lost 120 days of good time credit. The Appellant filed a grievance with the Department and received the Department's final decision on May 11, 2000. On June 12, 2000, the Appellant filed this appeal. After receiving the Appellant's Brief on October 18, 2000, I issued an Order on June 1, 2001, dismissing this case because the Department failed to file a brief. Following that Order, the Department made a Motion to Reopen the case arguing that it never received the Appellant's brief. Pursuant to that motion, I ordered both parties to supply the Division with any affidavits they believed supported their respective positions. After reviewing the affidavits submitted by the parties, I find that this case should be reopened.

Nevertheless, upon examination of the transcript of the Appellant's disciplinary hearing, it is apparent that it is of little use in determining whether the Appellant was afforded all process due the Appellant. As a result, there is insufficient evidence upon which this tribunal can rely to find that the Appellant was afforded due process before the Department sanctioned him with the loss of 120 days of good time. Consequently, I cannot determine whether that decision was supported by substantial evidence on the whole record. See S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-380(A)(6) (1986 & Supp. 2001). Because the record in this matter does not afford this tribunal the opportunity to conduct meaningful review of Appellant's claims, this case must be remanded to the Department to make further findings in order to establish a reviewable record. See David E. Shipley, South Carolina Administrative Law 7-57 (2d ed. 1989); see also D&D Leasing Co. of S.C. v. Gentry, 298 S.C. 342, 380 S.E.2d 823 (1989) ("The burden was on Petitioner, as appellant, to furnish a sufficient record from which an intelligent review could be conducted.").


IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this case is REMANDED to the Department to either prepare an accurate transcript based upon the hearing tapes upon which this Division can conduct meaningful review of the Appellant's claims or conduct another disciplinary hearing on the charge of SCDC Disciplinary Code 2.9 pursuant to its policies.



Ralph K. Anderson, III

Administrative Law Judge

June 25, 2002

Columbia, South Carolina

Brown Bldg.






Copyright © 2022 South Carolina Administrative Law Court