Legal Opinion
State v. Phair
South Dakota Supreme Court
Decided July 7, 2004No. NonePublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Per curiam
[¶ 1.] Wendy Phair appeals her conviction for grand theft by deception. We affirm.
FACTS
[¶2.] In early 2001, Phair’s daughter was looking for a used car to buy, but was unable to obtain a loan without a co-signer. Thus, on April 16, both Phair and her daughter went to First Federal Savings Bank in Sioux Falls where they obtained a loan of $4,925 for the daughter’s purchase of a car she had found. As part of the loan process, bank personnel explained to both Phair and her daughter what a lien was and that they would be required to give the bank a lien against the car purchased by the daughter.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- State v. CroninSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- United States v. Phillip RossomandoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- State v. AndersonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. VerhoefSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
- United States v. Kati Karro, AKA "Kathy Karro," AKA "Cathay Karro," AKA "Kitty M. Karro," AKA "K. Karrow," AKA "Kity Karro Polli,"Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- State v. PasekSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. MorseSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. GardSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2007
- State v. JacksonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. ReyesSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.