Hamlin v. StateHamlin v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Benham
Based upon two separate incidents, appellant was convicted of trafficking in cocaine and possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. On appeal he cites as error the trial court’s denial of his motion for a directed verdict of acquittal on the trafficking charge.
Appellant’s motion was premised on an alleged fatal variance between the allegata and probata. The indictment charged appellant “with having committed the olfense of TRAFFICKING IN COCAINE. For that [appellant], on the 9th day of November . . . 1987, at approximately 2:30 p.m., in [Bibb County, Georgia], was then and there knowingly in actual possession of more than 28 grams of a mixture with a purity of more than 10 percent of cocaine and did distribute said cocaine to Undercover Agent Bill Malarney. . . .” At trial, the State presented evidence that appellant, at the time and place alleged, had in his possession 140.25 grams of a mixture that was 76 percent pure cocaine which he distributed to Frank Perez, an informant used by Agent Malarney. Appellant maintains that the State’s failure to prove that he distributed the cocaine to Malarney, as alleged in the indictment, vitiates his conviction for trafficking in cocaine. We disagree.
The trafficking statute,
Assuming, arguendo, that the
distribution
of cocaine (not mentioned in
Judgment affirmed.
Deen, P. J., and Birdsong, J., concur.