Sullivan v. State

Following a bench trial, Michael Sullivan was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol to the extent it was less safe to do so.1 Sullivan appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion for new trial, contending that the evidence was legally insufficient; the trial court improperly considered similar transaction evidence; and the trial court improperly considered Sullivan’s refusal to perform field sobriety tests. Finding no error, we affirm.

“On appeal from a criminal conviction that follows a bench trial, the defendant no longer enjoys a presumption of innocence, and we view the evidence in a light favorable to the trial court’s finding of guilt.” Citation and punctuation omitted. Hinton v. State, 319 Ga. App. 673 738 SE2d 120 2013. “We do not weigh the evidence or determine witness credibility but only determine whether the evidence is sufficient under the standard of Jackson v. Virginia.2 This same standard applies to our review of the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion for new trial.” Stephens v. State, 247 Ga. App. 719 545 SE2d 325 2001.