564 S.E.2d 816 | Ga. Ct. App. | 2002
Following a full hearing in the juvenile court, W. B. appeals his adjudication of delinquency for simple battery, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support the adjudication. We affirm.
In considering a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting an adjudication of delinquency, we construe the evidence and every inference from the evidence in favor of the juvenile court’s adjudication to determine if a reasonable finder of fact could have found, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the juveniles committed the acts charged.
In the Interest of S. P.
A person commits simple battery when he or she either intentionally makes physical contact of an insulting or provoking nature with another person or intentionally causes physical harm to another. OCGA § 16-5-23 (a). The evidence, in this case, viewed with every inference in favor of the adjudication of delinquency, clearly establishes that the elements of simple battery were satisfied.
Viewed in this light, the record shows that the Waterford Home Owners’ Association asked its security guard, Mike Bailey, to speak with a large group of males refusing to get out of the roadway at the entrance to the subdivision. Bailey drove the security cart up to a group of males in the roadway. Jamal Driver, a juvenile and one of the males, was cursing Bailey and refused to speak with him when Bailey told him that he wanted to take him home to speak with his
In this case, the evidence was sufficient for the juvenile court, as finder of fact, to find the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
Judgment affirmed.
In the Interest of S. R, 240 Ga. App. 827 (525 SE2d 403) (1999).
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979).
In the Interest of G. J., 251 Ga. App. 299, 301 (554 SE2d 269) (2001).