Legal Opinion

State v. Holway

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided May 1, 2002No. NonePublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GILBERTSON, Chief Justice.

[¶ 1.] Thomas Holway and his ex-wife, Ellie Holway, were co-defendants tried together and convicted of three counts of delivery of drug paraphernalia in violation of SDCL 22-42A-4 and SDCL 22-3-3. The Holways allege a violation of procedural due process by claiming SDCL 22-42A-4 is unconstitutionally vague. Both defendants also appeal the sufficiency of the evidence as it relates to their intent to sell the smoking devices to contain, conceal or inhale a controlled substance, as well as their knowledge of the objects’ drug-related nature. We affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Posters 'N' Things, Ltd. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  3. State v. KnechtSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
  4. State v. BuchholzSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State v. HaugeSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1996

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. MoranSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2003
  2. State v. LaPlanteSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Daily v. City of Sioux FallsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
  4. Insituform Technologies, Inc. v. Employment Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Iowa · 2007
  5. State v. LaplanteSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2002

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API