Bradley v. State

Prison officials have authority to condition prison visits on visitors' willingness to submit to searches for contraband and other prohibited items, posted signs gave notice that all vehicles passing the state prison guard line were subject to searches and defendant, a prison correctional officer, consented to the search of her car when she drove it onto the prison's premises.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

A Calhoun County jury found Kanoshia Bradley guilty of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, OCGA § 16-13-30 b; possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, OCGA § 16-13-30 b; crossing a prison guard line with drugs, OCGA § 42-5-15 a; and violating the oath of office of a public officer, OCGA § 16-10-1. She appeals from the judgment of conviction, contending that the evidence was insufficient to support her convictions and that the court erred in admitting certain evidence and in denying her motion to suppress. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm. 1. Bradley contends the evidence adduced was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she knowingly possessed cocaine and marijuana with the intent to distribute. We disagree.

When a criminal defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his or her conviction, “the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Citation omitted; emphasis in original. Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U. S. 307, 318-319 III B 99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560 1979. The jury, not this Court, resolves conflicts in the testimony, weighs the evidence, and draws reasonable inferences from basic facts to ultimate facts. Id. “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.” Citation and punctuation omitted. Miller v. State , 273 Ga. 831, 832 546 SE2d 524 2001. Viewed in this light, the record reveals the following facts.1

Bradley v. State

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report