Summary
In Williams v. State, 199 Ga. App. 544 (405 S.E.2d 539) (1991), cocaine was divided between more than 30 small glassine or clear plastic packages, this court held that the manner of packaging authorized an inference that appellant intended to distribute the contraband.
Summary of this case from Bethea v. StateOpinion
A91A0854.
DECIDED APRIL 10, 1991.
Drug violation. Fulton Superior Court. Before Judge Jenrette.
Avis K. Hornsby, for appellant.
Lewis R. Slaton, District Attorney, Joseph J. Drolet, D. Victor Reynolds, Richard E. Hicks, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellee.
Defendant Williams appeals his conviction of a violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act (possession of cocaine with intent to distribute). Held:
1. Defendant's second enumeration of error contends that the evidence was not sufficient to support a conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. The argument in support of this enumeration is limited to the issue of whether defendant had an intent to distribute the cocaine found in his possession when he was detained at a roadblock. "To support a conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, the State is required to prove more than mere possession. Wright v. State, 154 Ga. App. 400, 401 ( 268 S.E.2d 378) (1980), cert denied 449 U.S. 900 (1980)." Sams v. State, 197 Ga. App. 201 (1), 202 ( 397 S.E.2d 751). In the case sub judice, the evidence shows that the cocaine was divided between more than 30 small glassine or clear plastic packages. This manner of packaging being commonly associated with the sale or distribution of such contraband would authorize any rational trier of fact to infer that the defendant possessed cocaine with intent to distribute. Bowers v. State, 195 Ga. App. 522 (1) ( 394 S.E.2d 141). The evidence was sufficient to meet the standard of proof required by Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560).
2. Defendant failed to preserve the issues raised in his remaining enumerations of error by timely objections in the trial court. Romano v. State, 193 Ga. App. 682 (1) ( 388 S.E.2d 757). We also note that defendant waived the right to enumerate the jury charge as error when upon inquiry by the trial court he neither objected to the charge as given nor reserved the right to later object. Davidson v. State, 183 Ga. App. 557 (1) ( 359 S.E.2d 372); Thomas v. State, 180 Ga. App. 575, 576 (3) ( 349 S.E.2d 807).
Judgment affirmed. Sognier, C. J., and Andrews, J., concur.