☢ test - Í

Hunt v. State, 288 Ga. 794, 708 S.E.2d 357 (March 18, 2011). Malice murder and related convictions affirmed; trial court properly admitted similar transaction evidence of prior incident where defendant stole a gun. “In both the earlier theft and the murder, Hunt stole 9 millimeter handguns from individuals with whom she had a close relationship and access, and then she lied to police in order to avoid arrest and prosecution.” 45. SIMILARITY OF OFFENSES -- TRAFFIC OFFENSES Shy v. State, 309 Ga.App. 274, 709 S.E.2d 869 (March 29, 2011). Convictions for vehicular homicide, reckless driving and related offenses affirmed; trial court properly admitted evidence of defendant’s four prior DUI offenses as similar transactions. In the present case, witnesses noted “a strong smell of alcohol” on defendant’s breath, and defendant told doctors he had been “drinking alcohol that day,” but a blood test was negative for alcohol and defendant wasn’t charged with DUI. Nevertheless, applies rule that “‘it is the simple act of driving while under the influence that establishes the commission of the crime. Evidence of a prior DUI offense, regardless of the circumstances surrounding its commission, is logically connected with a pending DUI charge as it is relevant to establish that the defendant has the bent of mind to get behind the wheel of a vehicle when it is less safe for him to do so.’ (Citations, punctuation and footnote omitted) Sanders v. State, 258 Ga.App. 16, 20(4), 572 S.E.2d 712 (2002); See Shockley v. State, 256 Ga.App. 892, 896(5), 570 S.E.2d 67 (2002) (in DUI case, ‘unlike crimes against persons or property which might occur under various factual circumstances, it is the simple act of driving while under the influence that establishes the commission of the crime’). This court has also previously held that where an accused is charged with reckless driving, test results showing his use of drugs are admissible because the reckless driving violation could have been precipitated by the drug usage. Nash v. State, 179 Ga.App. 702(4), 347 S.E.2d 651 (1986), overruled on other grounds, Atlanta Ind. School Sys. v. Lane, 266 Ga. 657, 658, 469 S.E.2d 22 (1996).” Taylor v. State, 304 Ga.App. 573, 696 S.E.2d 498 (June 24, 2010). Defendant’s convictions for first degree vehicular homicide affirmed; defendant’s prior convictions for speeding and stop sign violation properly admitted as similar transactions, “to prove Taylor's bent of mind and course of conduct in driving recklessly.” Ector v. State, 298 Ga.App. 847, 681 S.E.2d 654 (July 9, 2009). At defendant’s trial for fleeing and eluding, trial court properly admitted evidence of prior fleeing and eluding incident, even if same motivation for fleeing wasn’t proven. “[E]ven disregarding the evidence in both the prior and present offenses concerning suspected contraband, evidence that Ector had become physically aggressive and attempted to flee during a previous stop was relevant and admissible to show that Ector had a pattern of trying to run from police and assaulting them while attempting to do so. ‘As such, it was relevant to [Ector's] culpability [of the present offenses] and “its probative value, which showed a specific course of conduct and particular pattern of behavior, was not outweighed by its prejudicial effect.”’ Mills v. State, 273 Ga.App. 699, 702(3) (615 S.E.2d 824) (2005).” Putman v. State, 257 Ga.App. 902, 572 S.E.2d 412 (October 11, 2002). In prosecution for vehicular homicide with reckless driving as the underlying offense, defendant’s 11 prior speeding offenses were admissible “as going to a disregard for safety.” Settle v. State, 239 Ga.App. 476, 521 S.E.2d 423 (July 29, 1999). At defendant’s trial for driving on suspended license and related charges, trial court properly admitted similar transaction evidence of defendant’s prior convictions for driving on suspended license. “All three offenses demonstrate Settle's course of conduct in driving on the roads of Cobb County with a suspended license.” 46. STATEMENTS OF DEFENDANT AS SIMILAR TRANSACTIONS Newsome v. State, 288 Ga. 647, 706 S.E.2d 436 (February 28, 2011). Murder and related convictions affirmed; witness’s testimony about prior statement of defendant, wanting to commit an unrelated robbery, was not a “similar transaction” requiring pre-trial notice and hearing under USCR 31.3. “We hold that an accused's statements are not ‘independent offenses or acts’ unless those statements in and of themselves constitute a crime. See Boynton v. State, [197 Ga.App. 149, 150(1) (397 S.E.2d 615) (1990)]. Rather, statements such as the challenged words repeated by Bentley in this case clearly fall within the definition of character evidence, OCGA § 24-2-2, which is irrelevant and should be excluded unless admissible for some other legal purpose. Id. We accordingly overrule the language to the contrary in Smith v. State, [142 Ga.App. 1, 2(2) (234 S.E.2d 816) (1977)] and Waters v. State, [168 Ga.App. 920(2) (310 S.E.2d 774) (1983)].” Smith held that defendant’s prior “loose talk” in jail, proposing new offenses to commit, similar to the forgery charges as trial, was admissible as a similar transaction.