Opinion
2024-UP-206 Appellate Case 2022-000965
06-05-2024
Joseph Kelsey, #217218, Appellant, v. South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, Respondent.
Jonathan Edward Ozmint, of The Ozmint Firm, LLC, of Greenville, John H. Blume, III, of Law Office of John Blume, of Columbia, and Hannah Lyon Freedman and Allison Ann Franz, both of Justice 360, of Columbia, for Appellant. General Counsel Matthew C. Buchanan, of Columbia, for Respondent.
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.
Submitted May 1, 2024
Appeal From The Administrative Law Court Ralph King Anderson, III, Administrative Law Judge AFFIRMED
Jonathan Edward Ozmint, of The Ozmint Firm, LLC, of Greenville, John H. Blume, III, of Law Office of John Blume, of Columbia, and Hannah Lyon Freedman and Allison Ann Franz, both of Justice 360, of Columbia, for Appellant.
General Counsel Matthew C. Buchanan, of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM:
On February 15, 2022, Appellant Joseph Kelsey, #217218, filed with the Administrative Law Court (ALC) a notice of appeal from a decision of the South Carolina Board of Paroles and Pardons denying his application for parole. On June 3, 2022, the ALC issued an order dismissing Kelsey's appeal for failure to timely file his brief. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: SCALC Rule 62 ("Upon motion of any party, or on its own motion, an Administrative Law Judge may dismiss an appeal or resolve the appeal adversely to the offending party for failure to comply with any of the rules of procedure for appeals, including the failure to comply with any of the time limits provided by this section (V) . . . ."); SCALC Rule 60(A) ("Unless otherwise ordered or stayed by the operation of Rule 59, the party first noticing the appeal shall file an original brief within ninety (90) days after the date of assignment [to an Administrative Law Judge]."); SCALC Rule 60(B) (listing reasonable requirements for the contents of a brief); SCALC Rule 63 ("Except as provided in Rule 59, the filing of a motion does not toll any time limits imposed by these Rules."); SCALC Rule 59 (allowing for a stay of the time limits for filing the record and briefs only when a motion to dismiss the appeal has been filed); id. ("The filing of a motion other than a motion to dismiss shall not stay any time limits imposed by these Rules.").
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
GEATHERS, HEWITT, and VINSON, JJ., concur.