☢ test - Í

reversed on other grounds); trial court did not err by admitting rap lyrics defendant wrote and had in his possession at time of his arrest for fleeing from, and firing upon, police officers. Lyrics made reference to fleeing and killing police. “[T]he jury was authorized to find that in the lyrics Thomas had alluded to some violent encounter with police officers.” Accord, Castillo v. State , 281 Ga. 579, 642 S.E.2d 8 (February 5, 2007) (“the song lyrics alluded to drug usage and violent behavior, including killing, and arguably suggested [defendant] might be inclined to violence”); Pitchford v. State , 294 Ga. 230, 751 S.E.2d 785 (November 25, 2013) (violent writings “were unquestionably inflammatory and, in our view, contributed little of probative value,” but harmless at worst “given the strength of the other evidence against Pitchford) ( Pitchford disapproved on other grounds, State v. Chulpayev , 296 Ga. 764, 770 S.E.2d 808 (March 27, 2015)); Taylor v. State , 297 Ga. 132, 772 S.E.2d 630 (May 11, 2015) (rap lyrics discussing specifics of incident on trial were properly admitted). Solis v. State, 268 Ga.App. 493, 602 S.E.2d 166 (July 2, 2004). Cocaine trafficking and related conviction affirmed. When arrested, defendant was found to have in his possession cards referencing his existing parole officers. Held, the trial court did not err in admitting the cards into evidence. “Evidence of the circumstances surrounding an arrest is subject to the same standards of relevancy and materiality that govern the admission of all other evidence, and the decision whether to admit evidence connected to an arrest lies within the discretion of the trial court. Benford v. State, 272 Ga. 348, 350(3) (528 S.E.2d 795) (2000). Further, ‘all of the circumstances surrounding an arrest are admissible for whatever value the jury wants to place on them.’ Brumelow v. State, 239 Ga.App. 119, 123(5) (520 S.E.2d 776) (1999). Material evidence is not made inadmissible merely because it inadvertently places a defendant’s character in issue. Greer v. State, 199 Ga.App. 106, 107(1) (403 S.E.2d 825) (1991). The trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing this evidence to be admitted.” Jefferies v. State, 267 Ga.App. 694, 600 S.E.2d 753 (June 4, 2004). Aggravated assault and firearms convictions affirmed; not error to admit testimony that defendant had a gun when arrested, though the gun was not related to the offense charged; “‘[A]ll the circumstances connected with a defendant’s arrest are considered proper evidence to be submitted to the jury to be weighed by it for what they are worth.’” Accord, Patterson v. State , 274 Ga.App. 341, 618 S.E.2d 81 (July 12, 2005) (fact that defendant was found “pretending to be asleep under the deck” of a neighboring house); Blackwell v. State , 274 Ga.App. 579, 618 S.E.2d 190 (July 26, 2005) (No error “in admitting into evidence the ‘arsenal of firearms’ found in [defendant’s] car at the time of his arrest for stalking,” although defendant was not charged with using the weapons on that occasion); Artis v. State , 299 Ga.App. 287, 682 S.E.2d 375 (July 21, 2009) (possession of gun after armed robbery, even if not the same gun used in the crime, was admissible as part of res gestae). Compare Nichols (September 24, 2007), above (improper to admit evidence of several weapons found in defendant’s home upon his arrest, nine days after homicide, unrelated to the crime). Al-Amin v. State, 278 Ga. 74, 597 S.E.2d 332 (May 24, 2004). Malice murder and related convictions affirmed; State’s “evidence that the reaction of the community to the crime was ‘unusual’ in that no onlookers were present when the police arrived at the scene of the crime, thus implying that local witnesses feared the defendant…. merely described the crime scene and results of the investigation, both of which were relevant and admissible. See generally Corza v. State, 273 Ga. 164(2), 539 S.E.2d 149 (2000) (State is entitled to present evidence of the entire res gestae of a crime; this is so even if the defendant’s character is incidentally placed in issue).” Carter v. State, 266 Ga.App. 906, 598 S.E.2d 549 (April 9, 2004). Convictions for possessing sawed-off shotgun, obstruction, and related offenses affirmed. “After Carter’s arrest, the police found several items inside his car, including a shirt sleeve with two eye-holes cut into it . At trial, the court allowed the state to introduce photographs of the sleeve into evidence. Carter complains that the admission of the photographs was erroneous because it was irrelevant and was introduced solely to connect him to an armed robbery that had been committed in another county. We find no error. Articles found in the control of the defendant at or near the time of arrest are admissible as circumstances connected with the arrest, and circumstances surrounding an arrest are admissible for whatever value the jury wishes to place on them. Kirk v. State, 210 Ga.App. 440, 443(1) (436 S.E.2d 553) (1993). Because the shirt sleeve was found in Carter’s car pursuant to his arrest, the photographs of it were admissible for the jury’s consideration. Moreover, Carter cites no evidence to support his claim that the state attempted to connect the shirt sleeve to an armed robbery committed in another county. Rather, it appears from our review of the trial transcript that the photographs of the sleeve were introduced solely to show that it was one of several items found in Carter’s car in connection with his arrest .” Bay v. State, 266 Ga.App. 91, 596 S.E.2d 229 (March 4, 2004). Convictions for armed robbery and related offenses affirmed; no error in admitting guns found at time of defendant’s arrest. “Bay was arrested with two other men, and police