In no history is that be happened. Americans came with that capabilities with ther sm missiles. But thats not easy to happen.
In history , there are a lot anti-ship missiles that they didn't prove themselves. .What's the difference between aircraft and warship? Seeker of SAM can't detect bigger and slower targets.
C'mon, this argument is nonsense.
*SM6
SAMs can be used against surface targets.
If the missiles were already configured for that purpose - like SM6 - then no problem. But in general they may need reconfiguration (like in Ukraine where S-200 missiles have been reconfigured and re purposed to hit ground targets) .
Some SAMs may have proximity detonation to destroy air targets. These may prove to be ineffective against armour.
Also SAMs reconfigured for ground or surface attack may have difficulty in honing on to target effectively. Even missing targets completely due to not recognising it as targets may be too small and varied in sizes.
Another point that may be of importance is the fact that due to much denser air the missile has to fly through, the overall range capability could be greatly compromised.
However if properly configured and supported by the correctly designed radar systems, like NASAMS, there is nothing stopping the use of SAMs against ground and surface targets.