Tucker v. State

Smith, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of simple battery. We affirm.

1. In his first enumeration of error, appellant contends that "[t]he Court erred in overruling [appellant’s] motion for new trial on the ground that the verdict was contrary to the evidence.” We find no merit in that contention. There is ample evidence in the record from which a rational trier of fact could have found each and every element of the crime of simple battery beyond a reasonable doubt. See Boyd v. State, 244 Ga. 130 (5) (259 SE2d 71) (1979).

2. Appellant asserts that the trial court erred in refusing to give…