Following a jury trial, Joseph Bearfield was convicted of aggravated child molestation; aggravated assault; enticing a child for an indecent purpose; kidnapping; false imprisonment; cruelty to children; burglary; theft by taking; and, striking an unattended vehicle. Bearfield filed a motion for new trial, which the trial court denied. On appeal, Bearfield challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions. He also contends that the trial court erred in sustaining a hearsay objection to a medical report reflecting that the child victim had made an inconsistent statement and that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance. We discern no reversible error and affirm. On appeal from a criminal conviction, the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, and the defendant no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence; moreover, an appellate court does not weigh the evidence or determine witness credibility but only determines whether the evidence is sufficient under the standard of Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U. S. 307 99 S C 2781, 61 LE2d 560 1979. Conflicts in the testimony of the witnesses, including the state’s witnesses, are a matter of credibility for the jury to resolve. As long as there is some competent evidence, even though contradicted, to support each fact necessary to make out the state’s case, the jury’s verdict will be upheld. The testimony of a single witness is generally sufficient to establish a fact. Citation and punctuation omitted. Payne v. State , 269 Ga. App. 662, 662-663 605 SE2d 75 2004. The trial evidence showed that Bearfield and the nine-year old victim, G. G., resided in the same apartment complex. On September 1, 2007, Bearfield approached G. G. and her friend as they were walking toward G. G.’s residence. Bearfield asked the girls if they wanted to help him pass out some flyers. When the girls agreed to help, Bearfield took them to his neighboring apartment.
After luring the girls to his apartment, Bearfield instructed G. G.’s friend to leave. Upon being left alone in the apartment with G. G., Bearfield began squeezing G. G.’s buttocks and told G. G. to pull down her pants. G. G. complied because she was scared. Bearfield then told G. G. to turn around. G. G. attempted to leave the apartment, but Bearfield grabbed her arms and forced her onto the couch. Bearfield stood behind G. G., pulled down his pants, and attempted to insert his penis into G. G.’s anus. In describing the incident, G. G. stated that Bearfield’s penis touched the area of her anus, which caused her to feel pressure in her buttocks, but that there had been no anal penetration.
