From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Interest of R. A. W

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 10, 1990
398 S.E.2d 261 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990)

Opinion

A90A1190.

DECIDED OCTOBER 10, 1990.

Adjudication of delinquency. Chattahoochee Juvenile Court. Before Judge McCombs.

Hagler, Hyles Cain, M. Stephen Hyles, for appellant.

Douglas C. Pullen, District Attorney, Bradford R. Pierce, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.


A petition of delinquency was filed against appellant alleging that he committed the offenses of criminal damage to property (OCGA § 16-7-23), interference with government property (OCGA § 16-7-24) and criminal trespass (OCGA § 16-7-21). The trial court directed a verdict in favor of appellant on the counts of criminal damage to property and criminal trespass and adjudicated appellant delinquent based on the offense of interference with government property.

Appellant's sole enumeration of error is that the evidence was insufficient to support the adjudication of delinquency. "Where a juvenile is charged with an offense which for an adult would be a crime, the standard of proof in the lower court is `beyond a reasonable doubt.' [Cits.] On appeal we thus apply the rule of Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560) (1979), which is whether a rational trier of fact could reasonably have found from the evidence presented proof that the juvenile committed the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. [Cit.]" In the Interest of C. D. L., 184 Ga. App. 412 ( 361 S.E.2d 527) (1987).

A witness for the State testified that appellant admitted to her that he had torn down some traffic control signs in the neighborhood. "On appeal the Court is bound to construe the evidence with every inference and presumption in favor of upholding the findings of the trier of fact, here the trial court. [Cit.] The issues of the credibility of the witnesses and the resolution of conflicts in the evidence fall within the province of the trial court. [Cit.] Application of these principles leads to the conclusion that the evidence was sufficient. [Cit.]" In the Interest of C. D. L., supra.

Judgment affirmed. Banke, P. J., and Birdsong, J., concur.

DECIDED OCTOBER 10, 1990.


Summaries of

In the Interest of R. A. W

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 10, 1990
398 S.E.2d 261 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990)
Case details for

In the Interest of R. A. W

Case Details

Full title:IN THE INTEREST OF R. A. W., a child

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Oct 10, 1990

Citations

398 S.E.2d 261 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990)
398 S.E.2d 261

Citing Cases

In re of J. A. C

On appeal from an order of delinquency, we determine whether a rational trier of fact could have found from…

In the Interest of P. A. W

The mere fact that a person turns in stolen property to the police does not independently "[identify him] as…