Ayiteyfio v. State
308 Ga. App. 286
Ga. Ct. App.2011Background
- Ayiteyfio was found by police at 7:20 a.m. on I-85, seated in a running car stopped off the roadway with his door open and the engine running.
- He exhibited confusion, slurred speech, red/watery eyes, difficulty standing, and a strong odor of alcohol.
- Field sobriety tests indicated impairment; an inventory search revealed three partially filled liquor bottles in the car.
- Ayiteyfio agreed to a Breathalyzer test but could not provide a sufficient breath sample.
- The State introduced testimony of two additional DUI incidents within seven months: one for speeding with alcohol odor and an insufficient breath sample, and another head-on collision with strong odor of alcohol and observed intoxication.
- The trial court admitted similar-transaction evidence to show Ayiteyfio’s bent of mind and course of conduct regarding DUI.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was there sufficient evidence of DUI while driving? | Ayiteyfio contends no driving, given vehicle was parked. | State argues circumstantial evidence proves.drove while intoxicated. | Sufficient circumstantial evidence supported DUI conviction. |
| Was there sufficient evidence of possessing an open container? | State failed to prove bottles contained alcohol. | Bottles were vodka and tequila, partially filled, labeled accordingly. | Yes; evidence supported open-container conviction. |
| Did the trial court abuse its discretion admitting similar transactions? | Evid., separate incidents not sufficiently similar; improper purpose. | Incidents show bent of mind and course of conduct; sufficiently connected. | No abuse; proper purposes and sufficient similarity established. |
Key Cases Cited
- Deering v. State, 244 Ga.App. 30, 535 S.E.2d 4 (Ga. App. 2000) (circumstantial driving proof permissible)
- Jarriel v. State, 255 Ga.App. 305, 565 S.E.2d 521 (Ga. App. 2002) (circumstantial evidence supports DUI conviction)
- Deering v. State, 244 Ga.App. 30, 535 S.E.2d 4 (Ga. App. 2000) (standard of review for sufficiency of evidence)
- Whitehead v. State, 287 Ga. 242, 695 S.E.2d 255 (Ga. 2010) (similar transaction evidence admissible with proper connection)
- Caraway v. State, 286 Ga.App. 592, 649 S.E.2d 758 (Ga. App. 2007) (prior DUI admissible to show bent of mind)
- Steele v. State, 306 Ga.App. 870, 703 S.E.2d 5 (Ga. App. 2010) (admission of similar transactions proper for bent of mind)
- Bryant v. State, 304 Ga.App. 755, 697 S.E.2d 860 (Ga. App. 2010) (similarity and relevance of prior acts)