SCDSS v. Redd

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

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. THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent, v. Stephanie Franks and Kyle Redd, Defendants, Of whom Kyle Redd is the Appellant. In the interest of minors under the age of eighteen. Appellate Case No. 2019-002116 Appeal From Aiken County John M. Rucker, Family Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2020-UP-228 Submitted July 24, 2020 – Filed July 28, 2020 AFFIRMED Kimberly Yancey Brooks, of Kimberly Y. Brooks, Attorney at Law, of Greenville, for Appellant. Amanda Mange Scott, of Ken Allen Attorney, of White Rock; Scarlet Bell Moore, of Greenville; and Susanna M. Ringler, of South Carolina Department of Social Services, of Aiken, all for Respondent. Jessica Brilhante, of Aiken, for the Guardian ad Litem. PER CURIAM: Kyle Redd appeals the family court's final order terminating his parental rights to his minor child. See S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-2570 (Supp. 2019). 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 Redd's counsel. AFFIRMED.1 WILLIAMS, KONDUROS, and HILL, JJ., concur. 1 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.