Toi Cordy, convicted by a jury of driving under the influence of alcohol, less safe,1 appeals, contending that the evidence was legally insufficient and that the trial court erred in not giving one of her requested jury charges. Finding no error, we affirm. 1. We first consider the legal sufficiency of the evidence. On appeal from a criminal conviction, the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, and the defendant no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence; moreover, an appellate court does not weigh the evidence or determine witness credibility but only determines whether the evidence is sufficient under the standard of Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U. S. 307 99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560 1979.2 So viewed, the evidence was that, on December 5, 2010, around 8:00 p.m., Giovanny Aponte had gotten off work and was driving on Highway 92 off Fulton Industrial Parkway in Fulton County when he came up behind a silver Taurus in the left lane going slower than he was. Aponte was pulling into the right lane when the Taurus started into that lane without signaling, forcing Aponte to slam on his brakes to avoid a collision. Aponte called Fulton County 911 to report the incident and continued to follow the Taurus. Because they were approaching the Douglas County line, Fulton County transferred the call to Douglas County, which took over. While following the Taurus in Douglas County, Aponte observed it crossing over the center line into oncoming traffic with both left tires crossing entirely over the center line. Aponte observed this happen at least ten times. Aponte also observed the car’s speeds vary from 30 to 55 mph for no apparent reason. Aponte followed the Taurus until he saw it being pulled over by a Douglas County Sheriff’s car.
Douglas County Sheriff’s Deputy Mark Matthews, responding to the be-on-the-lookout call for an early 2000 silver Taurus with a paper tag, pulled over Cordy’s Taurus. He identified Cordy as the driver of the Taurus. According to Deputy Matthews, the Taurus was champagne in color, but was one of those paint jobs that looked different colors in different light. When asked by Deputy Matthews for her license and registration, Cordy appeared confused and moved very slowly and had to be asked several times for the documents. At one point, Cordy took her wallet out of her purse, opened it up, looked at her driver’s license, closed her wallet, and put it down. Asked if she had been drinking or taking medication, Cordy said no. When Deputy Matthews asked Cordy to get out of the car, she stumbled twice and had to put her hand on the car to steady herself. Asked if she had trouble with her legs, Cordy responded that she “needed to pee.” When she got out of the car, Deputy Matthews asked Cordy again if she had been drinking and she said she had been and she had had two or three drinks. Because he was not equipped with an alco-sensor, Deputy Matthews radioed for Deputy Michael Long to come administer that test. Deputy Long administered the test and Cordy tested positive for alcohol. Deputy Long also smelled the odor of alcohol on Cordy’s breath. Cordy also told Deputy Long she had had two drinks and also said she thought she was in Gwinnett County. Cordy was arrested and advised of the implied consent law. Asked if she understood it, Cordy did not respond. She was readvised of the implied consent law at the jail and, in response, said she “needed to pee.” Cordy did not ever agree to take the state administered test.
