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

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 4, 1987

Docket73623

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 353 S.E.2d 612 (Hubert v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

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

Pincite

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

353 S.E.2d 612, 181 Ga. App. 684, 1987 Ga. App. LEXIS 2569, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hubert-v-state-gactapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack