Nunnally v. State

Phipps, Presiding Judge.

Challenging his judgment of conviction, Ralph Nunnally contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdicts upon charges of: (i) turn signal violation, 1 and (ii) possession of less than one ounce of marijuana. 2 He also maintains that the drug evidence should have been suppressed as fruit of an illegal seizure. For reasons that follow, we affirm the conviction for the traffic offense and reverse the conviction for the drug offense.

The state’s witnesses testified to the following. On the afternoon of October 3, 2008, a patrol officer saw Nunnally twice…