State of Tennessee v. Andrew Curtis Beard, W2016-00223-CCA-R3-CD

In November 2012 undercover Task Force informant John “Pete” Beavers arranged a drug buy; officers searched and wired him and provided photocopied money.
Beavers met two men in a Pontiac; video recorded the encounter but did not clearly show the transfer of money or drugs.
Beavers testified he gave the money to Andrew Beard and Beard gave him a small baggie of powder cocaine; the TBI lab confirmed 0.24 grams of cocaine.
Deputy Lewis and video surveillance supported the timeline and circumstances of the buy; Lewis could not see a hand-to-hand exchange on video but observed interactions consistent with Beavers’ account.
Beard was tried, convicted of selling less than one-half gram of cocaine (Class C felony), and sentenced as a Range II multiple offender to eight years confinement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence to support conviction	State: testimony plus lab result and video support conviction	Beard: video does not conclusively show him making the sale; Beavers is not credible	Affirmed — viewed in light most favorable to State, jury reasonably credited Beavers and found elements proved

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes standard for sufficiency review)
State v. Cabbage, 571 S.W.2d 832 (Tenn. 1978) (appellate courts must view evidence in strongest light for prosecution)
State v. Bland, 958 S.W.2d 651 (Tenn. 1997) (credibility and weight of evidence are for the jury)
State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913 (Tenn. 1982) (burden on convicted defendant to show insufficiency on appeal)
State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. 2011) (same standard for direct and circumstantial evidence)