Legal Opinion

State v. Shoemaker

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided March 4, 1981No. 21400PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Harwell, Justice:

Sandra Foster Shoemaker appeals her conviction of obtaining a controlled substance by misrepresentation, deception and subterfuge in violation of Section 44-53-390(a) (3), Code of Laws of South Carolina (1976). We affirm.

Shoemaker contends that the trial judge erred by failing to grant her timely motion to quash the indictment against her. She asserts that the indictment is too general and that it fails to specify the alleged misrepresentations or deception.

The indictment provides in relevant part: “That SANDRA JEAN SHOEMAKER a/k/a SANDRA RENEE FOSTER did in Greenville County…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. CrenshawSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1980
  2. State v. TaborySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1974
  3. State v. DuncanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1980

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. State v. CurtisSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2004
  2. State v. WilkesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2003
  3. State v. BeamCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1999
  4. State v. WadeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
  5. State v. ReddickCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2002

12 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