Whether South Carolina's appellate courts failed to apply an exception to the mootness doctrine, where, as a result of an unconstitutional parole revocation hearing, Justice has a parole violation on his criminal record, where the blatantly illegal procedures employed by the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services are the standards by which they treat every unrepresented, indigent individual in South Carolina, where the remedy for future violations proposed by the state courts—filing a PCR application—was followed in this case yet failed to yield appellate review due to perceived mootness, and where a current South Carolina statute is unconstitutional based on longstanding United States Supreme Court precedent?

Whether South Carolina's appellate courts improperly applied the mootness doctrine in a case involving an unconstitutional parole revocation hearing that resulted in an improper parole violation record