Cornell Graves appeals from his convictions of reckless driving and driving under the influence of drugs (marijuana), contending that insufficient evidence supports them. As we find no merit in this contention, we affirm.
On appeal, we must view the evidence “in the light most favorable to the verdict and the appellant no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence; moreover, on appeal this court determines evidence sufficiency and does not weigh the evidence or determine witness credibility.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.)
Williams v. State,
Graves argues this evidence was insufficient to support conviction for driving under the influence of marijuana because the State produced no evidence of marijuana in his system. We find no merit in this claim because Graves’s refusal to submit to a test of urine or blood created an inference that these tests would have shown the presence of a prohibited substance.
Mendoza v. State,
Graves argues that the State also presented insufficient evidence of reckless driving, because there was no evidence he was
*421
weaving, speeding, or crossing the centerline. Under OCGA § 40-6-390 (a), “[a]ny person who drives any vehicle in reckless disregard for the safety of persons or property commits the offense of reckless driving.” We find that Graves’s conduct in almost hitting a police officer who was standing on the side of the highway constituted a reckless disregard for the safety of others.
English v. State,
Judgment affirmed.
