Reese v. State

The trial court was not authorized to increase the defendant's sentence after he started serving it.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

On appeal from his conviction for driving under the influence DUI and other crimes, Jason Reese argues that the evidence was insufficient as to per-se DUI and that the trial court erred when it denied his motion for mistrial and when it sentenced him. We affirm his conviction but vacate his sentence and remand for resentencing. “On appeal from a criminal conviction, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, with the defendant no longer enjoying a presumption of innocence.” Reese v. State , 270 Ga. App. 522, 523 607 SE2d 165 2004. We neither weigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of witnesses, but determine only whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a “rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U. S. 307, 319 III B 99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560 1979.

So viewed, the record shows that in the early evening of May 11, 2006, a woman heard a commotion outside, left her house, and saw Reese’s van in a ditch on her property. Reese was kicking the van, cursing it, making rude gestures at it, and trying to push it out of the ditch. Reese then went into a neighbor’s house and used the phone. From the time he entered the house until police arrived, the neighbor did not see Reese consume any alcohol. A police officer arrived at around 8:30 p.m. When the officer asked Reese how he was doing, Reese replied, “Drunk, and you” Reese gave the officer his name, used a racial slur to describe the unidentified person he thought had stolen his van, and explained that he had heard tires squealing, looked outside, and saw the van. When the officer pointed out that the windows, ignition and steering column of the van were intact, Reese could not explain how the van had been taken.

Reese v. State

The trial court was not authorized to increase the defendant's sentence after he started serving it.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report