Opinion
Appellate Case No. 2017-002298 Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-354
08-10-2018
South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent, v. Bethany F. Conner, Christopher Sible and Tonya Jacobs, Defendants, Of whom Bethany F. Conner is the Appellant, and Christopher Sible and Tonya Jacobs are Respondents. In the Interest of a minor under the age of eighteen.
Mary Patricia Crawford, of Walterboro, for Appellant. Anne Marie Ugarte, of South Carolina Department of Social Services, of Walterboro, for Respondent South Carolina Department of Social Services. Lyn Howell Hensel, of Law Office of Lyn Howell Hensel, of Columbia, for Respondent Christopher Sible. Tonya Jacobs, of Walterboro, pro se. Gregory Michael Galvin, of Galvin Law Group, of Bluffton, for the Guardian ad Litem.
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. Appeal From Colleton County
Gerald C. Smoak, Jr., Family Court Judge
AFFIRMED
Mary Patricia Crawford, of Walterboro, for Appellant. Anne Marie Ugarte, of South Carolina Department of Social Services, of Walterboro, for Respondent South Carolina Department of Social Services. Lyn Howell Hensel, of Law Office of Lyn Howell Hensel, of Columbia, for Respondent Christopher Sible. Tonya Jacobs, of Walterboro, pro se. Gregory Michael Galvin, of Galvin Law Group, of Bluffton, for the Guardian ad Litem. PER CURIAM : Bethany Conner appeals a judicial review order placing her minor daughter in the custody of Tonya Jacobs, granting Conner and Christopher Sible visitation at Jacobs's discretion, and allowing the Department of Social Services to close its case. Upon a thorough review of the record and the family court's findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Ex parte Cauthen, 291 S.C. 465, 354 S.E.2d 381 (1987), we find no meritorious issues warrant briefing. Accordingly, we affirm the family court's ruling and relieve Conner's counsel. AFFIRMED. SHORT, THOMAS, and HILL, JJ., concur.
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR. --------