402 S.E.2d 88 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1991
Andrew Barkley was convicted of possessing cocaine with the intent to distribute, and he appeals, enumerating the general grounds.
Appellant contends the evidence was insufficient for the jury to have concluded that he possessed the cocaine because the State failed to prove he resided in the apartment or, alternatively, because Rucker had equal access to the cocaine. We find no merit in either argument. The police surveillance of the apartment, in addition to the other evidence adduced, amply supported, if not demanded, a finding by the jury that appellant resided in 214-C. As to appellant’s equal access argument, the contraband was in a closed box on the shelf in a locked closet. No explanation was set forth in the transcript for Rucker’s presence in the apartment; no evidence was adduced regarding how long he had been present or whether he was a regular visitor. “ ‘If contraband is not in an open, notorious and equally accessible area, the equal access rule does not apply. This rule is not invoked as to persons who visit the (premises) prior to the search unless they are shown to have been on the premises either previously or frequently so as to have equal access with the defendant. (Cit.)’ [Cit.]” Nolton v. State, 193 Ga. App. 200, 201 (2) (387 SE2d 364) (1989).
From the evidence adduced, we conclude that a rational trier of fact reasonably could have found appellant guilty as charged beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979). See also Nolton, supra at 201-202 (2).
Judgment affirmed.