Opinion
2021-000083 Appellate Case 2021-000083
10-18-2021
South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent, v. Mendy Evans, Michael Evans, and Chiniko McCall, Defendants, Of whom Mendy Evans is the Appellant. In the interest of a minor under the age of eighteen.
Kimberly Yancey Brooks, of Kimberly Y. Brooks, Attorney at Law, of Greenville, for Appellant. Cody Tarlton Mitchell, Lucas Warr & White, of Hartsville, as the Guardian ad Litem for Appellant. Tracy L. Bomar-Howze, of The Howze Law Firm, of Rock Hill; and Scarlet Bell Moore, of Greenville, both for Respondent. C. Heath Ruffner, of McLeod & Ruffner, of Cheraw, for the Guardian ad Litem for the child.
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 October 15, 2021
Appeal From Chesterfield County Michael S. Holt, Family Court Judge.
Kimberly Yancey Brooks, of Kimberly Y. Brooks, Attorney at Law, of Greenville, for Appellant.
Cody Tarlton Mitchell, Lucas Warr & White, of Hartsville, as the Guardian ad Litem for Appellant.
Tracy L. Bomar-Howze, of The Howze Law Firm, of Rock Hill; and Scarlet Bell Moore, of Greenville, both for Respondent.
C. Heath Ruffner, of McLeod & Ruffner, of Cheraw, for the Guardian ad Litem for the child.
PER CURIAM.
Mendy Evans appeals the family court's final order that found her home was not safe for reunification, granted custody of her minor child with a relative, and allowed the Department of Social Services to close its case and forego providing further services. See S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-1700 (Supp. 2020); S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-1640 (Supp. 2020). 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 Mendy's counsel.
See also S.C. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Downer, SC Sup. Ct. Order dated Feb. 2, 2005 (expanding the Cauthen procedure to situations when "an indigent person appeals from an order imposing other measures short of termination of parental rights").
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
KONDUROS, HILL, and HEWITT, JJ., concur.