Scott v. State

Doyle, Judge.

After a jury trial, Demarri Scott was convicted of hijacking a motor vehicle1 and two counts of aggravated assault.2 Scott appeals *443the trial court’s denial of his subsequent motion for new trial, arguing that insufficient evidence supports his convictions and that a fatal variance exists between the indictment and the proof at trial. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence,

the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the…