A Gordon County grand jury indicted Stanley Max Stuart for 16 counts of financial transaction card fraud, two counts of violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act, and three counts of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The state entered an order of nolle prosequi with respect to the controlled substances violations. Stuart pled guilty to the firearm possession charges. After a trial, the jury convicted Stuart of five counts of financial transaction card fraud, and found him not guilty on the remaining fraud charges. On appeal, Stuart claims i his convictions for financial transaction card fraud were contrary to the evidence, ii the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the firearms found by police at the time of his arrest, and iii his sentence was unconstitutional because it was vindictive and violated his right to a trial by jury. For the reasons set forth below, we disagree and affirm. 1. Stuart claims the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions for financial transaction card fraud.1 On appeal from a criminal conviction, the appellant no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence, and we view the evidence in a light most favorable to the verdict.2 When evaluating the sufficiency of evidence, the proper standard for review is whether a rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This Court does not reweigh evidence or resolve conflicts in testimony; instead, evidence is reviewed in a light most favorable to the verdict, with deference to the jury’s assessment of the weight and credibility of the evidence.3 So viewed, the evidence shows that members of Stuart’s family, including his step-daughter, Misty Lackey, Lackey’s husband, Walter Allen Lackey, and Stuart’s wife, Julia Stuart, participated in a scheme whereby they obtained Wal-Mart credit cards in the names of non-existent businesses and used the cards to buy goods for their own use with no intention of repayment. Stuart was charged with financial transaction card fraud in connection with credit cards issued in the names of two of these businesses, Stuart Body Shop and Stuart Detail Shop, but the jury found Stuart guilty only in connection with use of the Stuart Detail Shop card.4
The transactions involving the Stuart Detail Shop card were: i an April 13, 2001 purchase in the amount of $319.81, signed for by Julia Stuart, ii an April 13, 2001 purchase in the amount of $1,379.46, signed for by “Stuart Detail,” iii an April 14, 2001 purchase in the amount of $985.43 signed for by “Stuart Detail Shop,” iv an April 16, 2001 purchase in the amount of $1,363.28 signed for by “Stuart Detail Shop,” and v an April 21, 2001 purchase in the amount of $385.93 signed for by “Stuart Detail Shop.” These purchases were made in a Wal-Mart store located in Gordon County. A substantial portion of the purchases were for gift cards and clothing, and a jury would be authorized to conclude that the purchased items were not intended for use in a business.
