Lane v. State

Shulman, Chief Judge.

Appellant was convicted of criminal use of an article with an altered identification mark. OCGA § 16-9-70 (Code Ann. § 26-1506). On appeal, he asserts that the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict of acquittal and his motion for new trial, contending that the state failed to prove every element of the offense, that the circumstantial evidence relied on by the state was insufficient to support a conviction, and that the state improperly released certain evidence prior to trial.

The state’s evidence showed that on December 7, 1982, appellant flagged…