Blankenship v. State

BLACKBURN, Presiding Judge.

Following a jury trial, Joseph Blankenship appeals his conviction for DUI (less safe)1 and possession of marijuana.2 He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and argues that the trial court erred (i) in denying his motion to suppress, (ii) in denying his request to strike four jurors for cause, and (iii) in giving certain jury charges. Discerning no error, we affirm.

1. When reviewing a defendant’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, and the defendant no longer enjoys the…