Opinion
2015-UP-244
05-06-2015
Jeremiah DiCapua, Appellant, v. South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, Respondent. Appellate Case No. 2014-001097
Jeremiah DiCapua, pro se. Assistant General Counsel Tommy Evans, Jr., of the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, of Columbia, for Respondent.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Submitted April 1, 2015
Appeal From The Administrative Law Court S. Phillip Lenski, Administrative Law Judge
Jeremiah DiCapua, pro se.
Assistant General Counsel Tommy Evans, Jr., of the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Dicapua v. State, Op. No. 2014-UP-432 (S.C. Ct. App. filed Nov. 26, 2014) (reversing a circuit court order granting DiCapua post-conviction relief for convictions of distribution of crack cocaine and possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine); Sloan v. Friends of Hunley, Inc., 369 S.C. 20, 25, 630 S.E.2d 474, 477 (2006) ("Generally, [a court] only considers cases presenting a justiciable controversy."); id. ("A justiciable controversy exists when there is a real and substantial controversy which is appropriate for judicial determination, as distinguished from a dispute that is contingent, hypothetical, or abstract."); Curtis v. State, 345 S.C. 557, 567, 549 S.E.2d 591, 596 (2001) ("An appellate court will not pass on moot and academic questions or make an adjudication where there remains no actual controversy."); McClam v. State, 386 S.C. 49, 55, 686 S.E.2d 203, 206 (Ct. App. 2009) ("[M]oot appeals result when intervening events render a case nonjusticiable." (alteration by court) (internal quotation marks omitted)).
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
THOMAS, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.