Hubert v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hubert v. State

353 S.E.2d 612, 181 Ga. App. 684, 1987 Ga. App. LEXIS 2569

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided February 4, 1987·No. 73623·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

McMurray, Presiding Judge.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of selling cocaine in violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act. Defendant’s motion for a new trial was denied and he appeals. In his sole enumeration of error, defendant asserts the evidence was insufficient to enable a rational trier of fact to convict defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. Held:

An undercover policeman testified that defendant sold him a substance which was subsequently identified as cocaine. Although defendant denied he sold the substance to the undercover agent, the testimony of the agent, standing alone, was sufficient to authorize a conviction. Fredericks v. State, 172 Ga. App. 379, 380 (1) (323 SE2d 265). Moreover, contrary to defendant’s contention, the State demonstrated with reasonable certainty that the cocaine introduced into evidence was the substance which defendant sold to the undercover agent. See Boyer v. State, 178 Ga. App. 372, 373 (1) (343 SE2d 146). The evidence was sufficient to meet the standard of proof required by Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560).

Judgment affirmed.

Sognier and Beasley, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

McMurray, Presiding Judge.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of selling cocaine in violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act. Defendant’s motion for a new trial was denied and he appeals. In his sole enumeration of error, defendant asserts the evidence was insufficient to enable a rational trier of fact to convict defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. Held:

An undercover policeman testified that defendant sold him a substance which was subsequently identified as cocaine. Although defendant denied he sold the substance to the undercover agent, the testimony of the agent, standing alone, was sufficient to authorize a conviction. Fredericks v. State, 172 Ga. App. 379, 380 (1) (323 SE2d 265). Moreover, contrary to defendant’s contention, the State demonstrated with reasonable certainty that the cocaine introduced into evidence was the substance which defendant sold to the undercover agent. See Boyer v. State, 178 Ga. App. 372, 373 (1) (343 SE2d 146). The evidence was sufficient to meet the standard of proof required by Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560).

Judgment affirmed.

Sognier and Beasley, JJ., concur.

Hubert v. State, 353 S.E.2d 612, 181 Ga. App. 684, 1987 Ga. App. LEXIS 2569 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

353 S.E.2d 612 (Hubert v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related