SCDSS v. Rodriguez
SCDSS v. Rodriguez
Opinion
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals
SC Department of Social Services, Respondent,
v.
Jose Antonio Rodriguez and Crystal Rodriguez, Defendants,
of whom Crystal Rodriguez is Appellant.
In the interest of: Jose Rodriguez, DOB: 2-20-92, Pedro Rodriguez, DOB: 2-8-93, Tomas Rodriguez, DOB: 7/8/94, Minors under the age of 18/F
Appeal From Abbeville County
Billy A. Tunstall, Jr. , Family Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-464
Submitted July 1, 2005 Filed July 26, 2005
AFFIRMED
John D. Compton, III, of Greenwood, for Appellant.
Scarlet B. Moore, of Greenwood, for Respondent.
Douglas Lamar Bell, of Greenwood, and Paul L. Agnew, of Abbeville, for Guardian Ad Litem.
PER CURIAM: Crystal Rodriguez appeals a family court order terminating her parental rights to her minor children Jose, Pedro, and Tomas. The family court terminated Rodriguezs parental rights based on her failure to support and visit her children, and a finding that termination of parental rights was in the childrens best interests.
Pursuant to Ex parte Cauthen, 291 S.C. 465, 354 S.E.2d 381 (1987), Rodriguezs counsel attached to the record of the family court proceedings an affidavit stating his belief that the pending appeal lacks merit. Rodriguez did not file a pro se response.
After reviewing the transcript in its entirety, we hold there are no meritorious issues warranting additional briefing. Accordingly, we affirm the family courts decision to terminate Rodriguezs parental rights.
AFFIRMED.[1]
GOOLSBY, HUFF, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.
[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rules 215 and 220(b)(2), SCACR.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.