State v. Rothschild
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Moore
Appellant was convicted of violating S.C.Code Ann. § 16-13-470(A)(4) (Supp.2001) which prohibits the possession of adulterants intended to defraud a urine drug screening test. We affirm.. FACTS
Appellant owns two stores in Richland County: Nicki’s Novelty Store and Michael’s Lingerie and Leather Shop. An ad for Nicki’s appeared in an issue of the Free Times Magazine which read: “Taking a drug test? Want to cleanse your system? We carry Readi-Clean, Carbo-Clean Plus, Quick Tabs, One Hour, Zydot, One Hour Klear, Body Flush.” On October 18, 1999, in response to the ad, undercover SLED agent…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Commission on Human RelationsSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- 44 Liquormart, Inc. v. Rhode IslandSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Curtis v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2001
- State v. BuckmonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2001
- State v. FergusonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1990
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. CherrySupreme Court of South Carolina · 2004
- State v. Al-AminCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2003
- State v. WildsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2003
- State v. ODEMSSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2011
- State v. MooreCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.