Insufficient Evidence for of Aggravated Assault Conviction In Georgia
An assault is committed by a person who "attempts to commit a violent injury to the person of another; or . . . commits an act which places another in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury." O.C.G.A. 16-5-20 (a) (1), (2).
The standard for reviewing a denial of a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal is whether under the rule of Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (99 S. Ct. 2781, 61 L. Ed. 2d 560) (1979), the evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty of the charged offense.
Moreover, the test established in Jackson is the proper test for us to use when the sufficiency of the evidence is challenged, whether the challenge arises from the overruling of a motion for directed verdict or the overruling of a motion for new trial based upon alleged insufficiency of the evidence. Lester v. State, 226 Ga. App. 373, 376 (2) (487 S.E.2d 25) (1997).