Casanova v. State

Miller, Judge.

Following a jury trial, Ezequiel Casanova was convicted of trafficking in methamphetamine and possessing methamphetamine with intent to distribute. Casanova appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his trafficking conviction. He also argues that the trial court erred in admitting certain evidence. For reasons that follow, we affirm.

1. On appeal from his criminal conviction, Casanova no longer enjoys a presumption of innocence, and we review the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict. See Williams v. State, 270 Ga. App. 424 (606 SE2d…