☢ test - Í

contends the court erred by ruling the State was not required to redact from a recording allegedly irrelevant and prejudicial statements he made during the course of the offense. He argues they put his character in issue even though he had not opened the door to such testimony. But evidence of statements made by the defendant during the commission of the offense are admissible as part of the res gestae of the crime even if it puts the defendant's character in evidence. McLendon v. State, 258 Ga.App. 133, 134(2), 572 S.E.2d 763 (2002).” Brown v. State, 307 Ga.App. 99, 704 S.E.2d 227 (November 24, 2010). Convictions for cocaine trafficking and related offenses affirmed; trial court properly admitted “evidence of Brown's status as a probationer because the probation itself was part of the res gestae of his arrest, which was effected after a search conducted under a Fourth Amendment waiver he gave as a term of his probation. See Hampton [ v. State, 287 Ga.App. 896, 899(2) (652 S.E.2d 915) (2007)].” Daniels v. State, 306 Ga.App. 577, 703 S.E.2d 41 (October 26, 2010). Defendants’ convictions for armed robbery, motor vehicle hijacking, and related offenses affirmed; no error in admitting evidence that the vehicle in which the defendants were riding when they committed the charged offenses, was also carjacked, although that offense was not on trial. “‘[T]he [S]tate is entitled to inform the jury of all the circumstances surrounding the commission of the crime or crimes charged and we find no error in admitting this evidence as part of the res gestae even though it may have incidentally placed defendant[s'] character in evidence.’ Sprattling v. State, 218 Ga.App. 576, 576-577(1) (462 S.E.2d 461) (1995).” Taylor v. State, 287 Ga. 440, 696 S.E.2d 652 (June 28, 2010). Defendant’s convictions for murder and possession of a firearm in the commission of a crime affirmed. “Taylor contends that the trial court erred by allowing a State's witness to testify that drugs were sold at the Center Hill Avenue house and by denying his motions for mistrial after the State argued in closing that the Center Hill Avenue house was a dope house. However, testimony about the circumstances of [victim] Smith's visit to the home, including that he had sought to purchase drugs there, was relevant and admissible to explain Taylor's motive in shooting Smith, even if the testimony may have impugned his character. See Collins v. State, 273 Ga. 30(2) (538 S.E.2d 34) (2000).” Hernandez v. State, 304 Ga.App. 435, 696 S.E.2d 155 (June 15, 2010). Defendant’s convictions for child molestation affirmed; fact that defendant had been drinking at time of incident was admissible as part of res gestae, even if it incidentally put defendant’s character in issue. Parks v. State, 304 Ga.App. 175, 695 S.E.2d 704 (May 25, 2010). Defendant’s convictions for child cruelty, terroristic threats, and criminal trespass affirmed; trial court properly admitted evidence of one victim’s injury received during incident, despite no evidence that defendant caused the injury. “Here, [victim] testified that during the incident, his arms were bruised but was uncertain how he received the injuries. Thus, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the photographs as part of the res gestae.” Dixon v. State, 303 Ga.App. 517, 693 S.E.2d 900 (April 7, 2010). Defendant’s convictions for kidnapping with injury, rape and aggravated assault affirmed; victim’s testimony that defendant told her “that he was going to kill me. He told me that he'd done it before and that he had no problem doing it” was “‘clearly admissible as part of the res gestae even if such evidence incidentally placed [Dixon's] character in evidence.’ (Punctuation and footnote omitted.) Mathis v. State, 299 Ga.App. 831, 835(1)(c)(i), 684 S.E.2d 6 (2009) (testimony that defendant said ‘he wasn't going back to jail’ as he fled scene of bank robbery was admissible as part of res gestae). Accord Kellibrew v. State, 239 Ga.App. 783, 786(3), 521 S.E.2d 921 (1999) (shooting victim's testimony that defendant said he ‘can't go back to jail’ immediately before the shooting was admissible as part of res gestae, even if it incidentally placed defendant's character in evidence).” Hawkins v. State, 303 Ga.App. 618, 694 S.E.2d 132 (March 29, 2010). Defendant’s conviction for possession of methamphetamine affirmed; mistrial not required where officer mentioned weapons charge originally made against defendant in this case but not charged in indictment. “‘Here, the trial judge acted immediately, ruled out the offensive testimony, and properly instructed the jury not to consider the testimony in its deliberations. Under the facts of this case, we cannot say that this amounted to an abuse of discretion.’ (Citations omitted.) Stanley v. State, 250 Ga. 3, 4(2), 295 S.E.2d 315 (1982).” Hernandez v. State, 303 Ga.App. 103, 692 S.E.2d 712 (March 24, 2010). Defendant’s convictions for kidnapping and related offenses affirmed; trial court properly admitted evidence that defendant was on probation, as it was relevant to explain that defendant gained access to victim, “a case manager at the agency where people on probation frequently