Sparks v. State, A90A0221
| Decision Date | 11 May 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. A90A0221,A90A0221 |
| Citation | 394 S.E.2d 407,195 Ga.App. 589 |
| Parties | SPARKS v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Willis A. Duvall, Edison, for appellant.
J. Brown Moseley, Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Appellant was tried by a jury and found guilty of possession of cocaine and driving under the influence of drugs in violation of OCGA § 40-6-391(a)(2). He appeals from the judgments of conviction and sentences entered by the trial court on the jury's guilty verdicts. The sole enumeration of error raises the general grounds.
1. Appellant consented to give a urine sample. At the Georgia State Crime Lab, the sample tested positive for cocaine. " Buffington v. State, 190 Ga.App. 365, 378 S.E.2d 884 (1989). See also Stevens v. State, 165 Ga.App. 814, 815(1), 302 S.E.2d 724 (1983).
2. The evidence that appellant had ingested cocaine was the only evidence adduced to show his violation of OCGA § 40-6-391(a)(2). However, that statute does not prohibit driving after ingesting any quantity of drugs. Compare OCGA § 40-6-391(a)(4). It prohibits driving "[u]nder the influence of any drug to the extent that it is less safe for [one] to drive...." OCGA § 40-6-391(a)(2). There was nothing from which the jury could have inferred that appellant was under the influence of cocaine to the extent that he was a less safe driver, such as additional evidence of his physical condition or conduct at the time of arrest. Under these circumstances, the evidence is not sufficient to convict appellant of driving under the influence in violation of OCGA § 40-6-391(a)(2). See Turner v. State, 95 Ga.App. 157, 97 S.E.2d 348 (1957); Clay v. State, 193 Ga.App. 377, 379(2), 387 S.E.2d 644 (1989). Therefore, the conviction and sentence for violation of OCGA § 40-6-391(a)(2) must be set aside.
Judgments affirmed in part and reversed in part.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Blackston
...814, 815, 302 S.E.2d 724, 725 (1983); Buffington v. State, 190 Ga.App. 365, 365, 378 S.E.2d 884, 885 (1989); Sparks v. State, 195 Ga.App. 589, 590, 394 S.E.2d 407, 408 (1990). Rather, the Georgia Supreme Court explained, "the presence of cocaine metabolites in body fluid is only circumstant......
-
Green v. State
...immediate past before the urine sample was given, and had therefore possessed the cocaine he subsequently ingested. Sparks v. State, 195 Ga.App. 589(1), 394 S.E.2d 407 (1990); Buffington v. State, 190 Ga.App. 365, 378 S.E.2d 884 (1989); Bentley v. State, 183 Ga.App. 112, 358 S.E.2d 274 (198......
-
Grant v. State
...443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560; Griggs v. State, 167 Ga.App. 581, 584(6), 307 S.E.2d 75. Compare Sparks v. State, 195 Ga.App. 589, 590(2), 394 S.E.2d 407, overruled on other grounds, Green v. State, 260 Ga. 625(1), 398 S.E.2d 360. Ms. Lampkin's testimony that the bag containing......
-
Davis v. State, A92A1609
...evening does not prove that he was under the influence of alcohol to the extent he was a less safe driver. Accord Sparks v. State, 195 Ga.App. 589, 590(2), 394 S.E.2d 407, overruled on other grounds, Green v. State, 260 Ga. 625-626(1), 398 S.E.2d 360 (1990) (proof of ingestion of cocaine do......