☢ test - Í

4. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ! Collum v. State, 281 Ga. 719, 642 S.E.2d 646 (March 19, 2007). In defendant’s prosecution for beating death of child, trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting similar transaction evidence of other acts of violence committed against relatives: “that Collum struck one of his sisters with a wrench when she was six or seven years old and he was a teenager; that Collum lost his temper with another elementary school-aged sister and threw her down on the sofa when he was a teenager; and that Collum beat his ex-wife during their marriage.” “The evidence at issue dealt with Collum’s violent behavior toward family members residing in the same home, even those significantly younger.” Accord, Brinson v. State , 289 Ga. 150, 709 S.E.2d 789 (April 26, 2011) (in beating death of his infant son, “evidence that appellant used violence against an adult with whom he had had a close, loving relationship was admissible to show his bent of mind in using violence against a member of his family”). Brigman v. State, 282 Ga.App. 481, 639 S.E.2d 259 (November 16, 2006). In defendant’s trial for aggravated assault of his wife, trial court properly admitted evidence of defendant’s prior assaults against wives and girlfriends. “In each incident, Brigman lashed out suddenly in anger and exerted his control over his female victim, at times when he perhaps felt he was losing control, such as when the relationship was ending or when the partner had behaved in a way that displeased him.” Maskivish v. State, 276 Ga.App. 701, 624 S.E.2d 160 (November 3, 2005). “‘In cases of domestic violence, prior incidents of abuse against family members or sexual partners are more generally permitted because there is a logical connection between violent acts against two different persons with whom the accused had a similar emotional or intimate attachment.[Cit.]’ Thomas v. State, 246 Ga.App. 448, 449(1) (540 S.E.2d 662) (2000).” Evidence of abusive and threatening behavior toward defendant’s ex-wife was properly admitted in his prosecution for similar acts in stalking former girlfriend. Accord, Chatfield v. State , 279 Ga.App. 32, 630 S.E.2d 178 (April 19, 2006); Breazeale v. State , 290 Ga.App. 632, 660 S.E.2d 376 (January 23, 2008). 5. EVIDENCE – CIRCUMSTANCES OF CHARGED OFFENSE/RES GESTAE Mason v. State, 325 Ga.App. 609, 754 S.E.2d 397 (January 24, 2014). Burglary and related convictions affirmed; no error in admitting evidence of defendant’s theft of victim’s credit cards and checks – crimes not charged in this indictment – because “evidence of the theft of these items by Mason established that Mason had stolen Degraffenreaidt's identity and thus linked Mason to the two forged checks at issue and explained why Degraffenreaidt's name appeared on those checks. As such, the theft of the American Express cards and personal checks were part of Mason's course of conduct pointing toward and leading up to Mason's forgery of the two checks using Degraffenreaidt's name and were aspects of the same criminal scheme. Under these circumstances, Degraffenreaidt's testimony was part of the res gestae of the forgery offenses and did not constitute similar transaction evidence requiring notice and a hearing.” Decapite v. State, 312 Ga.App. 832, 720 S.E.2d 297 (November 22, 2011). Armed robbery and related convictions affirmed; no motion or hearing required for admission of “extrinsic crimes” “because the alleged similar crimes evidence he complains about were nothing more than debit cards, credit cards, and identification cards that were retrieved from the safes found at his home. The evidence was introduced to show a connection between Decapite and the stolen safes, and not to show independent offenses so as to warrant a hearing under Williams. ” Walker v. State, 310 Ga. 223, 713 S.E.2d 413 (June 22, 2011). Armed robbery and related convictions affirmed; evidence of other offenses committed by defendant and his accomplices during their “four-day, multi-state crime spree” was properly admitted “to demonstrate the co-conspirators' modus operandi, identity, bent of mind, and motive.” Greenwood v. State, 309 Ga.App. 893, 714 S.E.2d 602 (June 14, 2011). Theft by receiving, entering auto, and related convictions affirmed; no error in admitting evidence “concerning a series of three car thefts, each theft followed by abandonment of the stolen vehicle in another neighborhood and a theft of another vehicle nearby, eventually leading to the abandoned Yukon found in the Lea Glen neighborhood and the stolen Yukon which Greenwood crashed into a fence. ‘One of the exceptions to the rule that on prosecution for a particular crime evidence which tends to show that the defendant committed another crime wholly independent from that for which he is on trial is irrelevant and inadmissible, is where the other crime is a part of the res gestae. ’ (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Sypho v. State, 175 Ga.App. 833, 835(3) (334 S.E.2d 878) (1985). In reviewing a trial court's ruling on the admissibility of evidence, ‘a trial judge's determination that evidence offered as part of the res gestae is sufficiently informative and reliable as to warrant being considered by the jury will not be disturbed on appeal unless that determination is clearly erroneous.’ (Citation and