☢ test - Í

defendant “had intentionally advised, encouraged, hired, counseled, or procured anyone to commit the crimes. Moreover, an accessory after the fact is not a party to the crime within the meaning of OCGA § 16-2-21. Martinez v. State, 222 Ga.App. 497, 499(2), 474 S.E.2d 708 (1996).” Shorter v. State, 239 Ga.App. 625, 521 S.E.2d 684 (August 17, 1999). Evidence supported defendant’s conviction as party to aggravated assault on a police officer where he drove the car that was being chased while passengers, on three separate occasions, fired guns at the pursuing officers. Anderson v. State, 237 Ga.App. 595, 516 S.E.2d 315 (April 12, 1999). “‘Where a party has possessed a firearm during the commission of a felony, an accomplice who is concerned in the commission of the crime under OCGA § 16-2-20 is likewise guilty of both offenses. [Cit.]’ Mitchell v. State, 225 Ga.App. 26, 28(1), 482 S.E.2d 419 (1997); see Brooks v. State, 208 Ga.App. 869, 870, 432 S.E.2d 612 (1993) (person who encourages murder by gun is also guilty of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony).” Accord, Green v. State , 298 Ga.App. 17, 679 S.E.2d 348 (May 18, 2009). Adamson v. State, 238 Ga.App. 105, 516 S.E.2d 310 (April 5, 1999). “[W]hen transactions involve relatives, slight circumstances can support the inference that the parties colluded. Carter, [v. State, 464, 465, 373 S.E.2d 277 (1988)]. Here, Watson and Adamson, who were sisters, entered the store together, shopped together, and checked out together. The loss control manager testified that he saw Watson trying to shield Adamson from view while Adamson was stuffing merchandise into her purse. The evidence, though slight, was sufficient to sustain [co-defendant] Watson’s conviction.” Accord, Ellis v. State , 292 Ga. 276, 736 S.E.2d 412 (January 7, 2013). Williams v. State, 236 Ga.App. 790, 513 S.E.2d 757 (March 5, 1999). “In this case, there was ample evidence from which the jury could have concluded that Williams was more than ‘merely present’ when his cohorts committed the offenses of kidnapping and hijacking a motor vehicle. Williams made no attempt to distance himself from the hijacking while it was occurring, nor did he offer Naveda any help whatsoever after Roof pulled a gun on him. In addition, ‘[t]here is evidence that he [drove the stolen vehicle for a full month before he was finally arrested] and remained with his associate [ ] ([sharing the use of the vehicle with Roof]) for some time after the [hijacking].’ In re: K.B., 223 Ga.App. 105, 108, 476 S.E.2d 875 (1996). During that time, he made a concerted effort to hide the vehicle’s true identity, and he also lied to Officer Daniel about the vehicle’s ownership.” Accord, Cook v. State , 314 Ga.App. 289, 723 S.E.2d 709 (February 22, 2012) ( Cook disapproved on other grounds, Davis v. State , 330 Ga.App. 711, 769 S.E.2d 133 (February 17, 2015)). Smith v. State, 236 Ga.App. 122, 511 S.E.2d 233 (January 27, 1999). In defendant’s armed robbery trial, trial court properly charged jury on parties to a crime. “Smith … contended that he was merely a passenger in the car and that two of the witnesses actually committed the robbery and assault. This evidence amply supported a charge on parties to a crime.” JJJJ. PENILE PLETHYSMOGRAPHY Leftwich v. State, 245 Ga.App. 695, 538 S.E.2d 779 (August 28, 2000). Child molestation conviction affirmed; trial court didn’t abuse its discretion “in refusing to permit a defense expert to testify about certain test results obtained during a penile plethysmograph examination.” “[P]enile plethysmography evidence has been explicitly and repeatedly found inadmissible in this State and other jurisdictions. See, e.g., Gentry v. State, 213 Ga.App. 24, 25(2), 443 S.E.2d 667 (1994).” KKKK. PHOTOGRAPHS, RECORDINGS AND VIDEOTAPES See also subheading FOUNDATIONS, above 1. AUTOPSY/VICTIM PHOTOGRAPHS Seminal case: Brown v. State, 250 Ga. 862, 866(5) (302 S.E.2d 347) (1983) (post-autopsy photos are only admissible when necessary “to show some material fact which becomes apparent only because of the autopsy.”) New case! Davis v. State, S16A0103, ___ Ga. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___, 2016 WL 3145125 (June 6, 2016). Felony murder conviction affirmed; no ineffective assistance of counsel based on failure to object to multiple photos of victim’s injuries.Notes that, under 2013 Evidence Code, issue now is governed by OCGA § 24-4-403, discussing whether the issue is substantially more prejudicial than probative. 1. Contrary to defendant’s argument, post-incision autopsy photographs