523 S.E.2d 592 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1999
Does one impersonate a peace officer when, driving a newer model Ford Crown Victoria (a car commonly used by police), he pulls up to the bumper of a speeding car at 1:30 in the morning, shines his bright lights into the car, pulls the car over by activating a siren and flashing blue lights, approaches the driver’s window of the car and asks the driver for his driver’s license, insurance and registration? A jury answered, Wes.” Freddie Stewart appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence for the jury’s verdict and the trial court’s denial of his motion for a directed verdict.
Stewart arrived at Nick’s Big Apple Club on a Saturday night just before closing time. Stewart drank one or two beers and purchased a table dance from one of the topless dancers, Sandra Patrella. Stewart wanted Patrella to dance another, but time did not
The standard of review is the same for the sufficiency of evidence for a conviction and the denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal.
Stewart points out that he did not say he was a peace officer, he did not wear a uniform, he did not display a badge, his car was not marked as a police car, his blue lights were unplugged when he was arrested the next day, and there was no evidence that he carried a weapon. He asserts that testimony he used blue lights was the only possible evidence that he held himself out as a peace officer and claims even that must be rejected because the jury acquitted him on a second charge for using blue lights. Stewart also asserts that he had the right to make a citizen’s arrest because the car he stopped was traveling erratically and going 85 mph.
Although Stewart did not expressly state he was a peace officer, when the evidence is considered in the light most favorable to the prosecution, it was sufficient to overcome a motion for a directed verdict and to support a conviction. The sufficiency does not depend upon whether Stewart used flashing blue lights or flashing white lights, as he testified. Also, because Georgia no longer recognizes the inconsistent verdict rule,
After reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we find that a rational trier of fact could have found Stewart guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crime for which he was convicted.
Judgment affirmed.
Hogan v. State, 210 Ga. App. 122, 123 (1) (435 SE2d 494) (1993).
(Citation, punctuation and emphasis omitted.) Id.; Gray v. State, 213 Ga. App. 507, 509 (1) (445 SE2d 328) (1994).
See OCGA § 16-10-23.
Milam v. State, 255 Ga. 560, 562 (2) (341 SE2d 216) (1986); Kimble v. State, 236 Ga. App. 391, 393 (1) (512 SE2d 306) (1999).
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979).