Following her conviction at a bench trial of possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, Judy Joyce Rogers1 appeals. In her sole enumeration of error, Rogers asserts that the trial court erred in denying her motion to suppress. We disagree and affirm. Three principles inform an appellate court’s review of a trial court’s ruling on a motion to suppress evidence found and seized while executing a search warrant. First, the trial court sits as the trier of facts, and its findings are analogous to a jury verdict and should not be disturbed if there is any evidence to support the findings. Second, the trial court’s decisions on the credibility of witnesses and questions of fact must be accepted unless clearly erroneous. Third, the appellate court must construe the evidence most favorably to the upholding of the trial court’s findings and judgments. Citations, punctuation, and footnotes omitted. Roberson v. State , 246 Ga. App. 534, 535-536 540 SE2d 688 2000.
So viewed, the record shows that Lieutenant Clay Carroll of the Southwest Georgia Drug Task Force applied for a warrant to search Rogers’s residence. When the warrant was executed, officers found and seized a quantity of marijuana located in a dresser drawer in the master bedroom and another quantity of marijuana in the kitchen, in a basket on top of the refrigerator. Rogers arrived at her residence during the search, and she was arrested for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. After reading Rogers her rights, Carroll asked her if any other marijuana was in the residence. Rogers answered affirmatively and showed Carroll two bags of marijuana in another bedroom. She also pointed out her scales and turned over the key to a metal box containing 24 hundred dollar bills. In a subsequent interview, after signing a waiver of her Miranda rights, Rogers admitted she had been selling marijuana.