Melton, Chief Justice. Following a January 4-5, 2016 jury trial, Garren Arnez Hill was found guilty of malice murder, felony murder, armed robbery, and various other offenses in connection with the robbery of a convenience store and the shooting death of store clerk Ajit Kumar Dwivedi.[1] On appeal, Hill contends only that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his convictions. We affirm. When evaluating the sufficiency of evidence, “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[s] beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Citation and emphasis omitted.) Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307, 319 (III) (B) (99 SCt 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979). On appeal, “this Court does not re-weigh the evidence or resolve conflicts in testimony, but instead defers to the jury’s assessment of the weight and credibility of the evidence.” (Citation omitted.) Curinton v. State, 283 Ga. 226, 228 (657 SE2d 824) (2008). Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence presented at trial reveals that, on August 24, 2014, Hill, a convicted felon, walked into a Big Brother 2 Food Mart in Fulton County, brandished a handgun, and hit the unarmed store clerk, Dwivedi, in the head with the handgun. Hill then shot Dwivedi multiple times, killing him, and stepped over Dwivedi’s body to grab money from the cash register before leaving the store. The incident was captured on video by the store’s security camera, and Hill’s uncovered face is clearly visible throughout the video. Two witnesses who knew Hill and who saw the video on the news recognized him as the person in the video committing the crimes. Hill was arrested, and he confessed to police that he shot Dwivedi and robbed cash from the convenience store. This evidence was more than sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find Hill guilty of all of the crimes for which he was convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. See, e.g., Howell v. State, 307 Ga. 865, 870-873 (1) (b) (838 SE2d 839) (2020) (evidence was sufficient to support murder, aggravated assault, and aggravated battery convictions where defendant confessed crimes to others and made statements to police incriminating himself, and where surveillance video showed defendant walking in the direction of the place where crimes took place); Velasco v. State, 306 Ga. 888, 891 (1) (b) (834 SE2d 21) (2019) (evidence was “easily sufficient” to sustain murder conviction where defendant admitted to police that he beat the victim with a hammer and where crime scene blood evidence and victim’s injuries were consistent with brutal beating and dragging). Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.
