A Chatham County jury convicted Edward Devoun Johnson of sale of cocaine and possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. On appeal, Johnson challenges the sufficiency of the evidence.1 For the reasons discussed below, we affirm.On appeal from a criminal conviction, this court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, and the defendant no longer enjoys a presumption of innocence. This court neither weighs the evidence nor judges the credibility of witnesses, but only determines whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U. S. 307 99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560 1979. Citation omitted. Riggins v. State , 281 Ga. App. 266, 268 635 SE2d 867 2006. So viewed, the evidence adduced at trial shows that in the summer of 2004, an agent with the Chatham-Savannah Counter Narcotics Team “CNT” was contacted by a confidential informant whom the agent had known for many years. The informant, an admitted drug addict, advised the agent that an individual named Edward Johnson was selling cocaine at 243 Ferrell Street in Chatham County. According to the informant, she had purchased cocaine from Johnson over 150 times during a 13 year period. The informant noted that in these prior buys, Johnson sometimes stored his cocaine in small prescription or medicine bottles, which he would flush down the toilet if approached by the police. Based on this information, the agent commenced an investigation and obtained a photograph of the defendant, which the agent showed to the informant. The informant identified the person in the photograph as Edward Johnson and confirmed that he was the individual who sold cocaine.
The agent subsequently set up a “controlled buy.” On July 21, 2004, the agent took the informant to a designated location near the Ferrell Street premises. The agent searched the informant, confirmed that she had no items on her person, and gave her $40 to purchase cocaine. The agent and several other CNT agents then positioned themselves in the area so that constant visual contact could be maintained with the informant as she entered and exited the premises.
