Strong v. State, 593 S.E.2d 719 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004). · Go Syfert
Search
Strong v. State, 593 S.E.2d 719 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
32 citation events (32 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Anthony Cyril Green v. State (gactapp, 2019-10-25)
Treatment trajectory · 2005 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2005 2015 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Anthony Cyril Green v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2019 · confidence medium
“The jury, not this Court, resolves conflicts in the testimony, weighs the evidence, and draws reasonable inferences from the evidence. [Cit.]” Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Powell v. the State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
“When a criminal defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his or her conviction, ‘the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.’ ” Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004) (citing Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 ( 99 S. Ct. 2781 , 61 LE2d 560) (1979)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Doyal v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2007 · confidence medium
“The jury, not this Court, resolves conflicts in the testimony, weighs the evidence, and draws reasonable inferences from the evidence.” (Citation omitted.) Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004). 2.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Eason v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2007 · confidence medium
However, “[a] s long as there is some competent evidence, even though contradicted, to support each fact necessary to make out the State’s case, the jury’s verdict will be upheld.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Leeks v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
Second, the finder of fact, “not this Court, resolves conflicts in the testimony, weighs the evidence, and draws reasonable inferences from the evidence.” (Citation omitted.) Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kelley v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
“The jury, *189 not this Court, resolves conflicts in the testimony, weighs the evidence, and draws reasonable inferences from the evidence.” Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004). 2.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Waddell v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
But, “[t]he jury, not this Court, resolves conflicts in the testimony, weighs the evidence, and draws reasonable inferences from the evidence.” (Citation omitted.) Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Wilburn v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
But, “[t]he jury, not this Court, resolves conflicts in the testimony, weighs the evidence, and draws reasonable inferences from the evidence.” (Citation omitted.) Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Mayo v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004); State v. Ellison, 271 Ga. App. 898, 903 (5) ( 611 SE2d 129 ) (2005).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Andrews v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
It is well settled, however, that “[t]he jury, not this Court, resolves conflicts in the testimony, weighs the evidence, and draws reasonable inferences from the evidence.” (Citation omitted.) Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Isaac v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
As long as there is some competent evidence, even though contradicted, to support each fact necessary to make out the State’s case, the jury’s verdict will be upheld. [There was evidence to support the jury’s findings.] (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004). 4.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) McKinney v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
First, “the jury, not this Court, resolves conflicts in the testimony, weighs the evidence, and draws reasonable inferences from the evidence.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257,258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Duvall v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
Andrews, P. J., and Mikell, J., concur. 1 Williams v. State, 217 Ga. App. 636, 638 (3) ( 458 SE2d 671 ) (1995) (citation and punctuation omitted). 2 OCGA§ 16-6-4 (a) (“Aperson commits the offense of child molestation whenhe or she does any immoral or indecent act to or in the presence of or with any child under the age of 16 years with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of either the child or the person.”). 3 Howard v. State, 268 Ga. App. 558, 559-560 ( 602 SE2d 295 ) (2004) (citation omitted). 4 Id. 5 Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004) (citatio…
discussed Cited "see" In Re TOJ (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Strong v. State, 265 Ga.App. 257, 258 , 593 S.E.2d 719 (2004).
discussed Cited "see" In the Interest of T. O. J. (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004).
discussed Cited "see" Rhines v. State (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2007 · signal: accord · confidence high
Patterson, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee. 1 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979). 2 (Citation omitted.) Rankin v. State, 278 Ga. 704, 705 ( 606 SE2d 269 ) (2004). 3 McClendon v. State, 287 Ga. App. 238 (1) ( 651 SE2d 165 ) (2007), citing Clark v. State, 275 Ga. 220, 221 (1) ( 564 SE2d 191 ) (2002). 4 (Citations omitted.) Rankin, supra; accord Strong v. State, 265 Ga. App. 257, 258 ( 593 SE2d 719 ) (2004). 5 OCGA§ 16-5-21 (a) (2). 6 OCGA §§ 16-2-20; 16-2-21.
Strong
v.
the State
A04A0057.
Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Jan 22, 2004.
593 S.E.2d 719
Patrick G. Longhi, for appellant., Patrick H. Head, District Attorney, Dana J. Norman, Jesse D. Evans, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellee.
Ellington, Andrews, Miller.
Cited by 16 opinions  |  Published
Ellington, Judge.

A Cobb County jury convicted David Michael Strong of selling cocaine in violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act, OCGA § 16-13-30, and selling cocaine within 1,000 feet of a school, OCGA § 16-13-32.4. Following the denial of his motion for new trial, Strong appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. Finding no error, we affirm.

[*258] When a criminal defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his or her conviction, “the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Citation and emphasis omitted.) Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307, 319 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979). The jury, not this Court, resolves conflicts in the testimony, weighs the evidence, and draws reasonable inferences from the evidence. Id. “As long as there is some competent evidence, even though contradicted, to support each fact necessary to make out the State’s case, the jury’s verdict will be upheld.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Miller v. State, 273 Ga. 831, 832 (546 SE2d 524) (2001).

Viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the evidence showed the following facts. At about 8:00 p.m. on October 4, 2000, an undercover officer, accompanied by a confidential informant, drove into the parking lot of a gas station known for drug activity. The gas station was located within 1,000 feet of the Walker School. The officer saw Strong and Terric David Randall, a/k/a Marius Cofie, standing side by side in the parking lot, near a bank of outdoor telephones. After one of the men waved the car over, the officer drove up to and stopped the car near the telephones. The informant told Randall he wanted to buy “a 20,” i.e., $20 worth of crack cocaine. Randall turned to Strong and said, “They need a 20.” Strong handed something to Randall, which Randall immediately handed to the informant in exchange for a $20 bill. The item was a rock of crack cocaine.

In challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, Strong points to a few conflicts in the evidence, such as the officer’s observation of Strong’s participation in the drug sale versus Randall’s testimony at trial accepting sole responsibility and exonerating Strong, and to bases for impeaching the credibility of the State’s witnesses, such as the failure of the officer to personally write a report of the events. But, as we have said, “the jury determines credibility and resolves conflicts in the evidence; this Court does not reweigh the evidence but only determines its legal sufficiency.” (Punctuation and footnote omitted.) Head v. State, 254 Ga. App. 550, 552 (4) (562 SE2d 815) (2002). Thus, any alleged conflicts in the testimony of the officer and Randall were resolved by the jury in determining Strong’s guilt. Id. Because the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find Strong guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offenses charged, we affirm. Woods v. State, 232 Ga. App. 367, 368 (1) (501 SE2d 832) (1998); Williams v. State, 218 Ga. App. 571, 572 (1) (462 SE2d 457) (1995). See Farmer v. State, 185 Ga. App. 512 (1) (364 SE2d 639) (1988) (witness’s testimony that he, rather than defendant, was[*259] responsible for driving violations did not render evidence insufficient to convict).

Decided January 22, 2004. Patrick G. Longhi, for appellant. Patrick H. Head, District Attorney, Dana J. Norman, Jesse D. Evans, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Andrews, P. J, and Miller, J., concur.