Serchion v

State, 293 Ga. App. 629, 667 S.E.2d 624 (2008). Victim’s testimony that the defendant kicked in the door of the victim’s residence, entered, pointed a shotgun at the victim, and threatened to shoot the victim if the victim did not give the defendant money was sufficient in itself to support the defendant’s conviction for armed robbery in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41(a). Reed v. State, 293 Ga. App. 479, 668 S.E.2d 1 (2008). Since the evidence established the defendant shot three men and took money from one of them, and two of the men survived and identified the defendant as the shooter, the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of armed robbery. Abdullah v. State, 284 Ga. 399, 667 S.E.2d 584 (2008). Two intruders entered a house through a window, threatened the occupants with handguns, and stole items from the house. As circumstantial evidence established that the defendant drove the get-away vehicle, the defendant was properly convicted as a party to armed robbery. Olds v. State, 293 Ga. App. 884, 668 S.E.2d 485 (2008). Evidence was sufficient to convict a defendant of armed robbery since the testimony of a 14-year-old accomplice was corroborated by testimony from a clerk in the store that was robbed by the defendant and others, and the state presented physical evidence—clothing worn by the robbers—that linked the defendant to the robbery. Sellers v. State, 294 Ga. App. 536, 669 S.E.2d 544 (2008). Evidence was sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction for armed robbery after a convenience store clerk was robbed at gunpoint by a perpetrator who was wearing a nylon stocking over the perpetrator’s head because: (1) the clerk recognized the defendant as the perpetrator by the defendant’s voice and physical build when the defendant returned to the store three days later as a customer; (2) the clerk later identified defendant as the perpetrator in a picture lineup; and (3) the 412 state presented the testimony of an expert polygraph examiner, who stated that defendant showed deception to questions concerning the armed robbery. Jones v. State, 309 Ga. App. 886, 714 S.E.2d 590 (2011). Because the defendant admitted entry into a home, the defendant’s statement to a witness, and the victim’s in-court identification of the defendant supported the defendant’s conviction of armed robbery and burglary under O.C.G.A. §§ 16-7-1(a) and 16-8-41(a), the jury could find that a conspiracy existed without regard to a coconspirator’s statements under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-5 (see now O.C.G.A. § 24-8-801 et seq.). Lewis v. State, 311 Ga. App. 54, 714 S.E.2d 732 (2011). Evidence was sufficient to enable a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of malice murder, felony murder while in the commission of armed robbery, armed robbery, and conspiracy to violate the Georgia Controlled Substances Act, O.C.G.A. § 16-13-20 et seq., through a violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-13-30(j)(1), because: (1) the defendant and another buyer met with the victim and another seller where the defendant and the other buyer inspected marijuana which the victim and the other seller had for sale; (2) after some discussion about price, the victim told the defendant what the price was and that the defendant could take it or leave it; (3) the defendant said that the defendant would take it, pulled a gun from the defendant’s waistband, and fatally shot the victim; and (4) there was conflicting testimony as to whether the defendant took the marijuana and ran away with the marijuana after shooting the victim. Darville v. State, 289 Ga. 698, 715 S.E.2d 110 (2011). Defendant’s convictions for armed robbery, aggravated assault, and malice murder were based on sufficient evidence when a victim in an apartment next to the defendant’s was fatally stabbed multiple times, there was physical evidence that tied the defendant to the criminal incident, and the defendant confessed to committing the crimes. Culpepper v. State, 289 Ga. 736, 715 S.E.2d 155 (2011). Trial court had sufficient evidence to 16-8-41 convict a defendant of armed robbery and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime as a party to those crimes by aiding and abetting, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 16-2-20, given evidence that the defendant helped plan the robberies of two game rooms, drove the getaway vehicle, and participated in the division of the proceeds. Norman v. State, 311 Ga. App. 721, 716 S.E.2d 805 (2011). Evidence was sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction for armed robbery, under O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41(a), because: (1) the perpetrator of a crime entered just before closing time a fast-food restaurant with a gun and directed the employees into a room, a cooler, and a freezer; (2) the perpetrator took money from the restaurant, shot one of the employees, and left the scene in the employee’s car; (3) one of the employees telephoned relatives with a cell phone and told them what was happening; (4) the relatives called the police, came to the restaurant, and saw the perpetrator drive away; (5) money, a gun, and discarded clothing was recovered from the car or the area where the perpetrator fled on foot; (6) a police officer, who was pursuing the perpetrator, was wounded in an altercation with the perpetrator when the officer’s gun discharged; (7) when the defendant later surrendered to the police, DNA from the officer’s blood was found on the defendant’s chest; and (8) the employees, the relatives, and the officer identified the defendant, a former employee of the restaurant who was fired days before the crime, as the perpetrator. Donald v. State, 312 Ga. App. 222, 718 S.E.2d 81 (2011). Evidence was sufficient to authorize the defendant’s convictions for hijacking a motor vehicle, in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-5-44.1(b), armed robbery, in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41, aggravated assault, in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-5-21(a)(2), and possession of a knife during the commission of a crime, in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-11-106(b), based on the defendant’s involvement as a party to the crimes, or as a coconspirator under O.C.G.A. § 16-2-20(b). The evidence presented was that: (1) when two people walked past the victim’s parked vehicle, one of the people held a knife to the victim’s stomach and ordered the victim to 413 Application (Cont’d) give the person the victim’s wallet and keys; (2) the victim complied; (3) the person with the knife got into the driver’s seat and the defendant, who had stood nearby during the incident, got into the passenger seat; (3) the victim identified the defendant as the person who got into the passenger seat; (4) the people drove away, but were apprehended; (5) the victim’s wallet was recovered, on the ground to the rear of the vehicle, on the passenger side; and (6) the defendant wanted to leave the area because there was a warrant for the defendant’s arrest. Harrelson v. State, 312 Ga. App. 710, 719 S.E.2d 569 (2011). Defendant’s forcible removal of a victim’s pajama top from the victim’s body at gunpoint, and the fact that the top was found with other stolen items at the home of the defendant’s accomplice was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant of armed robbery. Williams v. State, 295 Ga. App. 9, 670 S.E.2d 828 (2008). While a defendant was assaulting and raping a victim at gunpoint, the defendant’s accomplice was robbing the residence. As the defendant was legally responsible for the acts of the accomplice under O.C.G.A. § 16-2-20, the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of armed robbery. Williams v. State, 295 Ga. App. 9, 670 S.E.2d 828 (2008). Evidence was sufficient to support a defendant’s conviction for armed robbery when: (1) a codefendant testified that the defendant assisted in the robbery; (2) a store clerk testified that after the robbery, the defendant asked the clerk which way the codefendant went, and went in the same direction; (3) a videotape showed the defendant’s actions during the robbery; and (4) the defendant and the codefendant were discovered in the getaway car with the robbery proceeds in the defendant’s pocket. Dinkins v. State, 295 Ga. App. 289, 671 S.E.2d 299 (2008). Testimony by two victims that the defendant grabbed a purse from one of them and pointed a gun at both of them, and testimony from an eyewitness that the defendant fled from the police was sufficient to support the defendant’s convic- 16-8-41 tions for armed robbery and aggravated assault. Wallace v. State, 295 Ga. App. 452, 671 S.E.2d 911 (2009). In an armed robbery prosecution, as the victim identified the defendant as the driver of a car and the codefendant as the passenger who robbed the victim at gunpoint, and the pistol used in the robbery was found in the car’s locked glove compartment, to which only the defendant had the key, the evidence was sufficient to establish that the defendant aided and abetted the codefendant in the robbery under O.C.G.A. § 16-2-20, and sufficiently corroborated the codefendant’s accomplice testimony under former O.C.G.A. § 24-4-8 (see now O.C.G.A. § 24-14-8). Bailey v. State, 295 Ga. App. 480, 672 S.E.2d 450 (2009). Following evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of armed robbery: (1) two armed persons robbed a sandwich shop; (2) shortly thereafter, a witness saw the defendant and two others dividing cash among themselves, and heard one of them state they had just robbed the shop; and (3) shop employees, the other witness, and the defendant’s accomplice all identified the defendant as one of the robbers. Bihlear v. State, 295 Ga. App. 486, 672 S.E.2d 459 (2009). Trial court did not err by denying a defendant’s motion for a new trial with regard to the defendant’s convictions for armed robbery and possession of a firearm based on the trial court erroneously admitting the testimony of a witness, who was a long-time acquaintance of the co-indictee that the co-indictee had bragged about committing the robbery with the defendant as, although the state failed to establish a prima facie case of conspiracy, the admission was harmless in view of the victims’ consistent eyewitness testimony implicating the defendant in the robbery and the defendant’s admission of the intention to rob the store. Fisher v. State, 295 Ga. App. 501, 672 S.E.2d 476 (2009). Evidence supported convictions of malice murder, felony murder, armed robbery, and other crimes. An informant told police that the defendant bragged about one of the robberies; the informant correctly identified the manner in which the rob- 414 bery was committed, the types of items stolen, and the getaway car; police found the getaway car, which had been captured on surveillance tape, at the defendant’s apartment complex; the car was registered to one of the defendant’s parents; a search of the defendant’s apartment turned up clothing and a bag matching that of the robbers and drug paraphernalia stolen during the robberies; and the defendant’s DNA matched that found on broken glass at one of the crime scenes. Williams v. State, 284 Ga. 849, 672 S.E.2d 619 (2009). There was sufficient evidence to support a defendant’s convictions on two counts of armed robbery based on both victims’ identification of the defendant; the defendant being found in a nearby location to the truck stop where the attacks occurred walking rapidly away; and the defendant being found with exactly the amount of cash taken from one victim. Burden v. State, 296 Ga. App. 441, 674 S.E.2d 668 (2009). Sufficient evidence was presented to convict a defendant of armed robbery based on the identification of the defendant by the victims of the first robbery and the defendant’s admission to committing a second, similar robbery. Robinson v. State, 297 Ga. App. 43, 676 S.E.2d 770 (2009). Sufficient evidence supported a defendant’s convictions for armed robbery under O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41(a) as a knife was found at the scene and the defendant made a statement to the victim that the defendant also had a gun; the victim also made a positive identification of the defendant at a one-on-one showup. Crawford v. State, 297 Ga. App. 187, 676 S.E.2d 843 (2009). Sufficient evidence was presented to convict a defendant of armed robbery based on evidence that the defendant and a codefendant approached the victims’ rental car and brandished guns; while pistol whipping the victims and robbing the victims of the victims’ property, the defendant’s gun went off and fatally wounded the first victim; and a gun matching the caliber of bullet recovered from the first victim during the autopsy was found during the execution of a 16-8-41 search warrant at a hotel where the defendant had visited a guest on three occasions. Watkins v. State, 285 Ga. 107, 674 S.E.2d 275 (2009). Victim ‘‘throwing’’ money at armed robbery defendant. — Victim’s testimony showed that the defendant and the codefendant acted in concert to demand money from the victim at gunpoint and that the victim ‘‘threw’’ $15.00 at the codefendant; at that point, the armed robbery was completed and sufficient evidence supported the armed robbery conviction. Daniel v. State, 271 Ga. App. 539, 610 S.E.2d 90 (2005). Sufficient evidence supported the defendant’s convictions of armed robbery, burglary, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, and three counts of kidnapping arising from an incident in which the defendant and a companion robbed the victim at gunpoint, then forced the victim and the victim’s children into their house and tied the victim up with duct tape; the victim identified the defendant from a photo line-up, the defendant’s fingerprints were found at the scene, a store video showed the defendant buying the duct tape which was used, and the store manager identified the defendant as the buyer of the duct tape. Brownlee v. State, 271 Ga. App. 475, 610 S.E.2d 118 (2005). Evidence was sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction for armed robbery because the defendant told the victim that the defendant forgot the defendant’s wallet, left a store, returned, showed the victim the handle of a gun, the victim ran, and the defendant took the goods. Garrett v. State, 271 Ga. App. 646, 610 S.E.2d 595 (2005). Robbery of coin bag. — Evidence supported the defendant’s armed robbery conviction as the defendant picked up a coin bag from a table, twice pointed a gun at the victim’s neck, ordered the victim to kneel, demanded the victim’s wallet and keys, and left with the coin bag and the victim’s keys. Kirk v. State, 271 Ga. App. 640, 610 S.E.2d 604 (2005). Evidence was sufficient to support the first defendant and the second defendant’s convictions for murder, kidnapping, armed robbery, and burglary, as the evi- 415 Application (Cont’d) dence showed that they were involved in a scheme to rob someone who they believed to be selling large amounts of marijuana from the apartment, that they burst into the apartment brandishing guns, that one of the defendants fatally shot the person, and that the other defendant forced two people present to lie on the ground and divulge the location of a safe in the apartment that held money and marijuana. Howard v. State, 279 Ga. 166, 611 S.E.2d 3 (2005). Although defendant’s firearm was used by an accomplice with defendant’s consent during the course of robbery, the threatened use of that firearm and the fatal use of defendant’s shotgun was sufficient to convict defendant of armed robbery; moreover, evidence that defendant pointed the shotgun at the victim during the robbery established defendant’s guilt as a party to armed robbery. Weldon v. State, 279 Ga. 185, 611 S.E.2d 36 (2005). Armed robbery of DVDs. — Evidence supported defendant’s conviction for armed robbery as the robbery was completed as defendant approached the clerk with DVDs in hand just before the codefendant held the clerk at gunpoint; DVDs were later seen near the store where defendant and codefendant were apprehended, barefoot; police also found a handgun, a roll of red duct tape similar to the one used to restrain the clerk, and two pairs of shoes. Hall v. State, 274 Ga. App. 842, 619 S.E.2d 344 (2005). Evidence that defendant took money from the one victim, beat the victim while doing so, that defendant was armed at the time, that defendant had the victim removed from defendant’s house by the codefendant’s so that the one victim could be murdered elsewhere, and that the second victim was removed from defendant’s house by another codefendant, all after the one victim and the second victim were suspected of plotting to rob defendant, who was selling illegal drugs from defendant’s home, was sufficient to support defendant’s convictions for malice murder, kidnapping, armed robbery, and being in possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Mason v. State, 279 Ga. 636, 619 S.E.2d 621 (2005). 16-8-41 Evidence supported defendant’s conviction for armed robbery, attempted armed robbery, burglary, and one firearms offense because: (1) defendant confessed to the crimes; (2) a companion wore distinctive shoes that matched those of an armed robber; (3) two dust-free ski masks, similar to those worn by the armed robbers, were found in defendant’s very dusty utility closet; and (4) a small red car was parked near a restaurant that was robbed, officers stopped defendant two hours later, and defendant drove the same car to the police station when defendant came for voluntary questioning. Ray v. State, 273 Ga. App. 656, 615 S.E.2d 812 (2005). Evidence was sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions for armed robbery, in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41, and possession of a knife during the commission of a crime, because the defendant entered a convenience store, the defendant approached the cashier and demanded the money, and the defendant then pointed a knife at the cashier and again demanded the money; the defendant was identified by the cashier, items of the perpetrator’s clothing were seen on the defendant and then found near where the defendant was arrested, and the knife was discarded in close proximity to where the defendant was found. Todd v. State, 275 Ga. App. 459, 620 S.E.2d 666 (2005). Evidence was sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions of burglary, armed robbery, and malice murder, in violation of O.C.G.A. §§ 16-7-1(a), 16-8-41, and 16-5-1, respectively, because the defendant and a friend decided to rob the victim and they entered the apartment unlawfully with that intent, they stabbed and bludgeoned the victim, and they took a lock-box and left; although the evidence as to whether the defendant was let into the apartment by the victim willingly was conflicting, forced entry was not an element of burglary and accordingly, resolution of that fact did not change the sufficiency of the evidence for the burglary conviction. Redwine v. State, 280 Ga. 58, 623 S.E.2d 485 (2005). Armed robbery of a club. — Evidence was sufficient to support the convictions of murder, armed robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, and a statutory violation, 416 all in violation of O.C.G.A. §§ 16-5-1, 16-8-41, 16-5-21, 16-7-1, and 16-11-106, respectively, when the defendant and the codefendant went to a club with the intention of robbing someone, met the victim and drove the victim back to the victim’s home, beat and fatally stabbed the victim, and upon leaving the victim’s apartment, took some of the victim’s belongings. Willoughby v. State, 280 Ga. 176, 626 S.E.2d 112 (2006). Armed robbery of police investigator. — Police investigator’s testimony that the defendant held a three-inch knife to the investigator’s throat amply supported a conviction under O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41; the testimony of a single witness may be sufficient to establish a fact pursuant to former O.C.G.A. § 24-4-8 (see now O.C.G.A. § 24-14-8). Wallace v. State, 277 Ga. App. 280, 626 S.E.2d 229 (2006). Circumstantial evidence sufficient for conviction. — Armed robbery convictions were supported by sufficient circumstantial evidence since: (1) the defendant acted as the ‘‘getaway’’ driver for the two codefendants, and thus, was a party to the crimes; (2) the trial court properly substituted the court’s charge for the defendant’s requested charge because the court’s charge included pattern charges on parties to a crime, knowledge, mere presence at the scene of a crime, and mere association with others committing a crime, and substantially covered the same legal principles as the requested charge; and (3) the trial counsel’s strategy did not amount to ineffective assistance of counsel. Buruca v. State, 278 Ga. App. 650, 629 S.E.2d 438 (2006). Evidence that the defendant and others approached two separate victims while the defendant brandished a shotgun, that the defendant threatened the victims with the gun, and that the defendant and the compatriots stole both of the victims’ cars, sufficed to sustain convictions of two counts of hijacking a motor vehicle, two counts of armed robbery, two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and two counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony; the jury was free to disbelieve the defendant’s testimony that the defendant was coerced into threatening the victims at gunpoint 16-8-41 and participating in the car thefts. Martinez v. State, 278 Ga. App. 500, 629 S.E.2d 485 (2006). As the state presented direct, and not circumstantial, evidence from the victims supporting the jury’s finding of guilt, when this testimony was coupled with that from the police officers involved, substantial and sufficient evidence supported a conviction for armed robbery and related offenses; the fact that the defendant offered another explanation for the defendant’s presence at the scene did not render the other evidence insufficient or circumstantial. Bakyayita v. State, 278 Ga. App. 624, 629 S.E.2d 539 (2006). Armed robbery conviction was supported by sufficient evidence which showed that both victims identified the defendant as one of the persons who robbed the victims at gunpoint, that, shortly after the robberies, police located the defendant near the crime scene wearing clothes matching the description given by the victims, and that, although the defendant presented evidence that the defendant was at work until 10:00 P.M. on the night of the robberies, the work supervisor admitted to not seeing the defendant that night. Sorrells v. State, 279 Ga. App. 18, 630 S.E.2d 171 (2006). Defendant’s convictions of murder, felony murder, armed robbery, burglary, possession of a firearm during the commission of an armed robbery, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a burglary were supported by sufficient evidence that, the day before the three murder victims were found shot in the head, the defendant borrowed the defendant’s sibling’s car to visit one of the victims, who owed the defendant money, the defendant admitted going to the victims’ home twice on the day of the murders, but stated that the victims were not home during either visit, neighbors heard gunshots around the home at approximately 7:30 P.M., near the last time that the two younger victims were heard from, and again at 10:00 P.M. that evening, when the older victim returned home for the day, a number of items stolen from the victims’ home at the time of the murders were subsequently found in a dumpster next to a storage locker the defendant shared with a love 417 Application (Cont’d) interest, the items were contained in plastic bags that had the defendant’s fingerprints on them, and the plastic bags came from a roll of trash bags found in the trunk of the car which the defendant borrowed on the day of the murders. Griffin v. State, 280 Ga. 683, 631 S.E.2d 671 (2006). Armed robbery at ATM. — Pictures of a defendant withdrawing money from a victim’s ATM account and evidence that the defendant repeatedly asked the victim for the PIN number for the victim’s ATM card, held a knife to the victim’s neck, cut the cord used to tie the victim, and had cash, an ATM receipt, and the victim’s car keys when the defendant was arrested were sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions for armed robbery, two counts of aggravated assault, kidnapping with bodily injury, and two counts of possessing a knife during the commission of a crime. Wright v. State, 282 Ga. App. 649, 639 S.E.2d 581 (2006). When the victim was killed during the theft of the victim’s vehicle, the evidence was sufficient for a jury to convict the defendant of felony murder, aggravated assault, and armed robbery; the defendant told others where the vehicle was, then stripped the vehicle; a call had been placed from the victim’s cell phone to the house of one of the defendant’s grandparents; police had found some of the victim’s belongings at the home of the defendant’s cousin; and a witness and two cousins of the defendant had stated that the defendant had admitted shooting the victim. Paige v. State, 281 Ga. 504, 639 S.E.2d 478 (2007). Evidence was sufficient to sustain a defendant’s convictions for a total of 20 counts of armed robbery, possessing a firearm during the commission of a crime, terroristic threats and acts, kidnapping, and aggravated assault arising out of four separate robberies because the victims’ testimony, the physical evidence, and one victim’s identification of the defendant as the robber provided sufficient corroboration of the testimony of the defendant’s accomplice. Metoyer v. State, 282 Ga. App. 810, 640 S.E.2d 345 (2006). There existed sufficient evidence to up- 16-8-41 hold the defendant’s convictions for armed robbery and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony because the evidence established that the victim, an airline pilot, was robbed at gunpoint at approximately 4 A.M., with the perpetrator taking the victim’s luggage and fleeing in a Ford Ranger pickup truck and that, within two to three minutes after calling 9-1-1, an officer stopped the speeding Ford Ranger and apprehended the defendant, who was wearing clothing as described by the victim and the luggage was found in the back of the pickup truck. Feaster v. State, 283 Ga. App. 417, 641 S.E.2d 635 (2007). Defendant’s convictions of malice murder, armed robbery, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony were supported by the evidence, which included use of the murder weapon during a later robbery by the defendant’s accomplices, a video that provided a corroborating account of the shooting, and the defendant’s spontaneous inculpatory statements while being transported from Maryland to Georgia. Stokes v. State, 281 Ga. 825, 642 S.E.2d 82 (2007). Armed robbery to steal drugs. — As the evidence provided by the state at defendants’ criminal trial demonstrated that based on information from defendant-B regarding a large quantity of marijuana possessed by a victim, defendant-A and another man forcibly entered the victim’s residence while defendant-A was armed, pushed the victim to the ground, demanded to know where the marijuana was, and a physical struggle resulted, the evidence supported defendants’ convictions for burglary, armed robbery, and aggravated assault; defendant-B was convicted as a party to the crimes under O.C.G.A. § 16-2-20(4). Garland v. State, 283 Ga. App. 622, 642 S.E.2d 320 (2007), rev’d on other grounds, 282 Ga. 201, 657 S.E.2d 842 (2008). Evidence supported the defendant’s convictions for felony murder predicated on armed robbery, armed robbery, and aggravated assault because the evidence showed that the defendant and the codefendant, after discussing the idea of stealing marijuana and whatever cash the victim had on the victim, arranged to meet 418 with the victim to buy marijuana from the victim. When the victim got into the back seat of the defendant’s vehicle and pulled out a bag of marijuana, the codefendant drew a gun and shot the victim, fatally wounding the victim. Herbert v. State, 288 Ga. 843, 708 S.E.2d 260 (2011). Evidence supported the defendant’s convictions for malice murder, felony murder, criminal attempt to commit armed robbery, armed robbery, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime because: (1) the defendant participated in the armed robbery of three people, including the shooting victim, who were sitting in a car on a neighborhood street; (2) during the encounter, the co-indictee fatally shot the victim in the head with a shot gun; (3) one of the two other people in the car testified that, after the shooting, the defendant, with the defendant’s hand in the defendant’s pocket simulating that the defendant had a gun, took money and drugs from the witness; (4) the co-indictee also took money from the other person; and (5) the defendant and the co-indictee then fled the scene. Gilyard v. State, 288 Ga. 800, 708 S.E.2d 329 (2011). Court rejected the defendant’s argument that the evidence was insufficient to support the defendant’s conviction of armed robbery under O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41(a) because the evidence failed to show that anything of value was taken from the victim’s person or immediate presence by use of a deadly weapon; contrary to the defendant’s argument, the evidence established that one of the defendant’s accomplices forced the victim at gunpoint through the victim’s home and into the back bedroom closet during which time the robber demanded money and the contents of a box, that the victim struggled with the armed robber, that the victim’s blood was found on the closet floor, and that the robber took a bag of cash and cocaine from the victim’s closet. Watson v. State, 308 Ga. App. 871, 708 S.E.2d 703 (2011). Defendant’s convictions for kidnapping, hijacking a motor vehicle, armed robbery, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, carrying a concealed weapon, and possession of a weapon on 16-8-41 school property were authorized because pursuant to former O.C.G.A. § 24-4-8 (see now O.C.G.A. § 24-14-8), the victim’s testimony alone established the essential elements of the offenses. Lester v. State, 309 Ga. App. 1, 710 S.E.2d 161 (2011). Evidence that the defendant owned a firearm, gunshots were heard in the area of the shooting, the fatal attack occurred after a drug deal which the defendant was brokering for the victim went bad, the victim obtained a large sum of money to accomplish the drug buy, and the defendant or one of the defendant’s cohorts was seen retrieving a bag of money. Brown v. State, 291 Ga. 892, 734 S.E.2d 23 (2012). Testimony of the female victim and the accomplice that the defendant held a pistol on both victims and demanded and took cash from the male victim, along with the DNA evidence on the floor at the scene of the rape, was sufficient for the jury to find that the defendant was guilty of kidnapping with bodily injury (by rape) and rape against a female victim, and kidnapping and armed robbery against a male victim. Brinkley v. State, 320 Ga. App. 275, 739 S.E.2d 703 (2013). Sufficient evidence existed to support the defendant’s convictions for aiding and abetting armed robbery, burglary, aggravated assault, and false imprisonment based on the evidence that the defendant was a party to the crimes, including evidence that the defendant drove the codefendants to the house just before the crimes were committed; that the defendant was in the vehicle when plans to commit the crimes were discussed; that the defendant waited in the victim’s driveway when the codefendants entered the front door of the house, wearing masks and carrying guns; and that the defendant drove the perpetrators away from the scene after the crimes were committed— speeding, driving erratically, and not stopping when the police, with sirens and lights activated, began following the vehicle. Simon v. State, 320 Ga. App. 15, 739 S.E.2d 34 (2013). Defendant’s convictions for armed robbery and aggravated assault were supported by sufficient evidence in that, even absent fingerprint evidence, there was the identifications of two eyewitnesses as well 419 Application (Cont’d) as a bottle bearing the store’s logo and the amount of cash and same denomination reported stolen found on the defendant’s person. Hamlin v. State, 320 Ga. App. 29, 739 S.E.2d 46 (2013). Victim’s testimony that the defendant approached the victim, thrust a gun about six inches from the victim’s face, took the victim’s cell phone and keys, and told the victim to ‘‘get out of here’’, while waving a gun, was sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions for armed robbery, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, aggravated assault, and theft by taking. Wright v. State, 319 Ga. App. 723, 738 S.E.2d 310 (2013). Evidence that the defendant kicked in a door and entered an occupied apartment with others, the defendant provided the guns used, the defendant placed a gun to one victim’s head, a victim’s wallet and key were taken, and marijuana, digital scales, and a device used to grind marijuana were found at the defendant’s house was sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions for four counts of aggravated assault, three counts of false imprisonment, and one count each of armed robbery, burglary, possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Thompson v. State, 320 Ga. App. 150, 739 S.E.2d 434 (2013). Armed robbery of change machine. — Evidence supported the defendant’s convictions of malice murder, felony murder, armed robbery, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony when the defendant had gone to the victim’s laundromat and waited until the victim opened a change machine, pointed a gun at the victim’s head and ordered the victim to put the money in a bag, told the victim, ‘‘Hell, yeah, I’ll kill you,’’ and shot the victim multiple times; eyewitnesses, including two who knew the defendant, had identified the defendant as the perpetrator. Cooper v. State, 281 Ga. 760, 642 S.E.2d 817 (2007). Evidence supported the defendant’s convictions of malice murder, two counts of felony murder, kidnapping with bodily 16-8-41 injury, two counts of armed robbery, and aggravated battery since: the defendant had been seen fleeing the victim’s home in a car registered to the defendant; the defendant told the defendant’s spouse to discard the defendant’s bloody clothing; the defendant sought treatment at a hospital after being shot during the crimes; and the defendant had initiated conversations in which the defendant described the actions of the defendant’s companions in discarding guns used in the crimes and offered to reveal the names of the companions in exchange for not being charged with murder. Davis v. State, 281 Ga. 871, 644 S.E.2d 113 (2007). Evidence was sufficient to sustain the defendant’s convictions of armed robbery and of possessing a firearm during the commission of a crime when: (1) the defendant’s codefendants testified that the defendant participated in the armed robberies of which the defendant was convicted; (2) one victim identified the defendant as the victim’s assailant; (3) two victims identified a gun that was recovered from the vehicle of the defendant’s girlfriend as the gun used to rob the victims; (4) a victim’s purse was recovered from the residence where the defendant was arrested; and (5) police found a sweatshirt and a ski mask in the girlfriend’s car that matched a victim’s description of the items worn by one robber. Cartledge v. State, 285 Ga. App. 145, 645 S.E.2d 633 (2007). Given that the testimony of the defendant’s codefendants was sufficient to support convictions on four counts of armed robbery and four counts of possessing a firearm during the commission of a crime, the convictions were not subject to reversal. Cartledge v. State, 285 Ga. App. 145, 645 S.E.2d 633 (2007). There was sufficient evidence to support the defendant’s convictions of malice murder, felony murder, two counts of armed robbery, and aggravated assault when the defendant shot and killed the first victim while the victim was making a night deposit at a bank and robbed the second victim, a bartender, at gunpoint a month later; the defendant and an accomplice fully confessed to both crimes, the confession to the bank crime was corroborated 420 by a bank surveillance tape showing the murder in progress, and a bouncer witnessed the robbery of the bartender and grappled with the defendant at the scene. Simmons v. State, 282 Ga. 183, 646 S.E.2d 55 (2007). Evidence supported the defendant’s convictions of two counts of malice murder, armed robbery, and possession of cocaine after: a driver carrying a gun and a bag ran out of a car that had been dragging the body of the car’s owner and that had another dead victim in the passenger seat; bags of cocaine were on the lap of the victim in the passenger seat; one victim had been shot with a .44 caliber weapon; a canine unit located a .44 caliber revolver, cash, a man’s clothes with cocaine in them, and a shoulder bag in the woods into which the driver had fled; the defendant came out of the woods wearing only underwear; and the defendant admitted to shooting the victims. Preston v. State, 282 Ga. 210, 647 S.E.2d 260 (2007). There was sufficient evidence supporting the defendant’s convictions of armed robbery, burglary, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, and criminal trespass; the evidence included a custodial statement in which the defendant admitted participating in the crimes and testimony by a witness as to the preparations for the robbery, the clothing worn by the defendant and by the accomplice, and the defendant’s disposal of a gun. Medlin v. State, 285 Ga. App. 709, 647 S.E.2d 392 (2007). Because: (1) the trial court did not err in admitting certain identification evidence alleged to be hearsay as testimony relative to the identification was not offered for the truth of the matter asserted; (2) the defendant’s requested instruction was not tailored to the facts and was potentially confusing; and (3) the defendant’s character was not placed in issue, convictions of armed robbery, hijacking a motor vehicle, and obstruction were all upheld. Jennings v. State, 285 Ga. App. 774, 648 S.E.2d 105 (2007), cert. denied, No. S07C1576, 2007 Ga. LEXIS 667 (Ga. 2007). Because the state presented sufficient evidence supporting the convictions entered against the first two defendants, a 16-8-41 letter one of the defendants wrote was admissible against all as a statement of a coconspirator, no error resulted from the admission of a red baseball bat, and the first defendant’s trial counsel was not ineffective, the first defendant’s convictions of armed robbery and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony and the second defendants’ convictions of the lesser included offense of robbery were upheld on appeal. Williamson v. State, 285 Ga. App. 779, 648 S.E.2d 118 (2007). Armed robbery of taxi cab. — In a case where four persons riding in a stolen car robbed a cab driver at gunpoint, the evidence was sufficient to sustain the defendant’s convictions as a party to the crimes of armed robbery and possession of a weapon during the commission of a crime; the defendant led a detective to the gun the defendant possessed and admitted being in the stolen vehicle on the date in question, and a witness testified that the witness saw the defendant holding a gun and approaching the cab driver. Jones v. State, 285 Ga. App. 866, 648 S.E.2d 183 (2007). Sufficient evidence existed to support the defendant’s conviction for armed robbery in a case where the defendant and the defendant’s accomplices used a weapon to forcibly keep the victim away from the victim’s property, including the victim’s wallet, while the property was being taken. Allen v. State, 286 Ga. App. 82, 648 S.E.2d 677 (2007). Because contradictions and uncertainties in the testimony did not render the evidence against the defendant insufficient but were ultimately for the jury to decide, and the victim’s testimony that the gun used to commit the crime was not actually pointed at the victim did not mean that the intruders, including the defendant, did not commit an armed robbery, the evidence presented, which authorized the jury to find that the defendant participated in the committed crimes, was sufficient to support the defendant’s armed robbery conviction. Sheely v. State, 287 Ga. App. 92, 650 S.E.2d 762 (2007). Toy pistol. — Because the defendant’s display of a gun handle created a reasonable apprehension on the part of the vic- 421 Application (Cont’d) tim that the defendant intended on using an offensive weapon to cause that victim to comply with a demand for money, sufficient evidence supported the defendant’s armed robbery conviction; moreover, the fact that the offensive weapon might have ultimately been proven to only be a toy gun was inconsequential. Price v. State, 289 Ga. App. 763, 658 S.E.2d 382 (2008). Evidence supported the defendant’s convictions for malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, armed robbery, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. The four victims were found dead in two hotel rooms from gunshot wounds to the back of their heads; identification documents belonging to the four victims were found in the defendant’s car; there was expert testimony that the defendant’s gun had been used to kill the victims; the defendant’s baseball cap contained one victim’s deoxyribonucleic acid; there was evidence that the defendant and two friends used three victims’ tickets to attend a football game after the victims were murdered; the defendant was identified as being in an elevator with one victim; the defendant was seen leaving the hotel with one victim’s cooler; and a duffle bag belonging to one victim was in the defendant’s car when the defendant was arrested on weapons charges. Dawson v. State, 283 Ga. 315, 658 S.E.2d 755 (2008), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 169, 172 L.Ed.2d 122 (2008). There was sufficient evidence to support convictions of armed robbery and of possessing a firearm during the commission of a felony. Both of the defendant’s codefendants testified as to the defendant’s participation in the events in question, which was sufficient evidence to find the defendant guilty; furthermore, the codefendants’ testimony was corroborated by that of the victims. Hill v. State, 290 Ga. App. 140, 658 S.E.2d 863 (2008), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 405, 172 L.Ed.2d 287 (2008). Evidence was sufficient to support convictions of malice murder, armed robbery, and aggravated assault when the defen- 16-8-41 dant demanded that the victim ‘‘break bread’’, hit the victim three times with a metal flashlight, and rummaged through the victim’s pockets after the victim refused, hit the victim again after the victim refused to turn over a ring, and then took the ring. Gibson v. State, 283 Ga. 377, 659 S.E.2d 372 (2008). Evidence was sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions of armed robbery, aggravated assault, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, and kidnapping under O.C.G.A. §§ 16-5-21, 16-5-40, 16-8-41, and 16-11-106 as: (1) a robber ordered two store employees at gunpoint to give the robber money, then ordered the employees to go into a back room; (2) the employees described the robber and the robber’s vehicle in detail; (3) the employees positively identified the defendant as the robber 15 to 20 minutes after the crime following a pursuit during which the defendant fled from police first in the defendant’s vehicle, then on foot; and (4) the defendant had $281 in a pocket at the time of arrest. Lenon v. State, 290 Ga. App. 626, 660 S.E.2d 16 (2008). Armed robbery of a cell phone. — Evidence was sufficient to support armed robbery conviction when the victim testified that the defendant took the victim’s cell phone while the defendant pointed a gun at the victim and threatened to shoot the victim; under former O.C.G.A. § 24-4-8 (see now O.C.G.A. § 24-14-8), testimony of a single witness was generally sufficient to establish a fact. Burden v. State, 290 Ga. App. 734, 660 S.E.2d 481 (2008). Evidence was sufficient to enable the jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty of armed robbery because the evidence fully authorized the jury to find that the defendant borrowed the cell phone of one of the victims, intending never to return the phone due to the defendant’s concern that the phone could be used to connect the defendant to the victims’ murders; nothing in O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41(a) limits a conviction for armed robbery to the particular item a defendant originally intended to take by means of the use of an offensive weapon. Vergara v. State, 287 Ga. 194, 695 S.E.2d 215 (2010). 422 Evidence was sufficient to enable the jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of armed robbery in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41 because although the defendant did not actually use a weapon, the defendant’s accomplice’s use of a weapon could be attributed to the defendant because under O.C.G.A. § 16-2-20, one who intentionally aided or abetted the commission of a crime by another was a party to the crime and equally guilty with the principal; the defendant aided and abetted the accomplice by telling the accomplice to pull into an apartment complex after they saw the potential victims, giving the accomplice the defendant’s gun, and then taking the victims’ wallets from the victims while the accomplice pointed the gun at the victims. Barber v. State, 304 Ga. App. 453, 696 S.E.2d 433 (2010). Evidence was sufficient to enable a rational trier of fact to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed three armed robberies because there was evidence that items were taken from at least three men by use of a gun; there was evidence that the items were taken from the men or ‘‘them,’’ as well as evidence that there were four men in the immediate area at the time. Ward v. State, 304 Ga. App. 517, 696 S.E.2d 471 (2010). Combined direct and circumstantial evidence was more than sufficient to authorize a rational jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of armed robbery, kidnapping, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime because at trial, the employees, a manager, and a customer of the two finance companies that were robbed testified to the events and identified defendant as the perpetrator of the respective robberies, and the state presented evidence that the six eyewitnesses previously identified the defendant in a lineup as the perpetrator; the state introduced into evidence fictitious loan applications that were associated with the two robberies and testimony from the landlord, a human resources director, and the county detectives linking defendant to information contained in those applications, and the state also introduced into evidence the handgun, clothing items, and sticky note seized dur- 16-8-41 ing the search of defendant’s residence. Walker v. State, 305 Ga. App. 607, 699 S.E.2d 902 (2010). Because defendant admitted to police that defendant had planned the robbery that led to the victim’s death, defendant was a willing participant in the robbery and shooting; consequently, the evidence was sufficient to find defendant guilty of felony murder, armed robbery, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. Branchfield v. State, 287 Ga. 869, 700 S.E.2d 576 (2010). Evidence was sufficient to allow the jury to find all defendants guilty of armed robbery beyond a reasonable doubt because the victim testified that one of the defendants had a knife during the attack and that all three defendants struck and kicked the victim while taking the victim’s necklaces and money. Cruz v. State, 305 Ga. App. 805, 700 S.E.2d 631 (2010). Testimony of an accomplice that the defendant was with the others during the robbery of the first victim and ran off and ate pizza with everyone afterward and the testimony of the second victim identifying the defendant at trial as the man the second victim spoke to about selling a Blackberry while an accomplice put a gun to the second victim’s neck, searched the second victim’s pockets, and took the second victim’s Blackberry and wallet, was sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions for armed robbery and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Fuller v. State, 320 Ga. App. 620, 740 S.E.2d 346 (2013). Evidence that the victims were robbed by individuals driving a Honda Civic who were armed with a gun; that the defendant admitted to distracting the victims while the other participants robbed the victims; that the defendant was wearing a plaid shirt when arrested, like the first victim testified one assailant was wearing; that the defendant and the other participants ran from the Civic shortly after an officer attempted to stop the car for driving without headlights; and that the first victim’s purse and the second victim’s checkbook were found in the Civic, from which the defendant was seen exiting and fleeing was sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction for armed 423 Application (Cont’d) robbery. Lindsey v. State, 321 Ga. App. 808, 743 S.E.2d 481 (2013). Evidence that the defendant and an accomplice were both tied to robberies just before and just after the robberies of the second and third victims, an officer observed the defendant and the accomplices exit a car registered to the defendant’s mother shortly after the robberies, and items stolen from the second and third victims were found in that car, was sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions for the second and third robberies. Wickerson v. State, 321 Ga. App. 844, 743 S.E.2d 509 (2013). Evidence that the defendant was found in the laundry room of the home that was the subject of the home invasion; police found masks, gloves, money, a gun, and some of the victim’s jewelry in or near the laundry room; and the defendant’s DNA was found on one of masks recovered supported the defendant’s convictions for armed robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. Rudison v. State, 322 Ga. App. 248, 744 S.E.2d 444 (2013). Evidence that the victim identified the defendant as the robber with a gun and to whom the victim was forced to give money and a recording from a device the victim wore where a male was saying to get out of the car before he shot someone in the face was sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction for armed robbery. Biggins v. State, 322 Ga. App. 286, 744 S.E.2d 811 (2013). Sufficient evidence supported the defendant’s convictions for armed robbery, false imprisonment, kidnapping, and aggravated assault based on the state showing that the defendant held the four boys at gunpoint, forced the boys into the pool to restrict their ability to flee, and stole two cell phones and money from the boys before fleeing. Smith v. State, 342 Ga. App. 656, 805 S.E.2d 251 (2017). Length of time of possession of stolen goods. — When the victim complied with the defendant’s demand by taking off three of the victim’s rings, but then refused to comply with the defendant’s de- 16-8-41 mand that the victim remove the rest, the evidence supported a conviction of armed robbery. The jury was entitled to find that the defendant obtained physical possession of the three rings in response to the first demand; it was irrelevant how long the defendant retained possession of those rings. Brown v. State, 297 Ga. App. 631, 678 S.E.2d 101 (2009). Evidence supported the defendant’s convictions of armed robbery, kidnapping, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, and financial transaction card fraud. Shortly after a man called the store where the victim worked to see if the store was open, a masked man with a gun came into the store, ordered the victim to the back, and then robbed the store and took the victim’s credit cards; soon afterward that same morning, the defendant bought sneakers with the victim’s credit card; the clerk who sold the defendant the sneakers identified the defendant at trial and in a photographic lineup and testified that the clerk knew the defendant because the defendant was a regular customer; and the defendant’s cell phone records showed that just before the robbery, the defendant called the victim’s store and blocked the defendant’s number. Anderson v. State, 297 Ga. App. 733, 678 S.E.2d 498 (2009), aff ’d, 287 Ga. 159, 695 S.E.2d 26 (Ga. 2010). Evidence was sufficient for the jury to find the defendant guilty of armed robbery. The evidence, including testimony from the victim and an accomplice witness, indicated that the defendant and a third accomplice put a gun to the victim’s head and demanded that the victim give the perpetrators the victim’s money and that the perpetrators, while carrying a gun, accompanied the victim to a check-cashing store and to automatic teller machines so that the victim could get money. Varner v. State, 297 Ga. App. 799, 678 S.E.2d 515 (2009). Evidence that the defendant pulled a gun on the victim, hit the victim in the face and the head with the gun, and snatched the victim’s necklace from the victim’s neck and carried the necklace 30 yards away before dropping the necklace was sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction for armed robbery. Harris v. 424 State, 334 Ga. App. 299, 779 S.E.2d 83 (2015). Testimony from a victim that one of the three gunmen pointed a gun at the armed robbery victim and took money from the victim was sufficient to support the first defendant’s conviction for armed robbery. Ray v. State, 338 Ga. App. 822, 792 S.E.2d 421 (2016). While the victim could not identify the gunman, the combined testimony of the other witnesses was sufficient to enable a rational jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt as the perpetrator of the charged crimes, including armed robbery and aggravated battery, and to exclude every reasonable hypothesis except that of the defendant’s guilt. Epperson v. State, 340 Ga. App. 25, 796 S.E.2d 1 (2016). Inferring guilt of armed robbery by conduct before, during, and after crime. — Convictions of felony murder, O.C.G.A. § 16-5-1, and armed robbery, O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41, were supported by sufficient evidence because, inter alia, the defendant acted as a lookout and deterred two potential customers while a codefendant entered the victim’s restaurant, shot the victim to death, robbed the cash register, and stole the victim’s wallet; after the shooting, the defendant and the codefendant fled the scene together and went to a friend’s apartment, where the defendant changed the defendant’s shirt to disguise the defendant’s identity. Proof of the defendant’s direct commission of the crimes was not required because the jury could infer the defendant’s participation from conduct before, during, and after the crime. Washington v. State, 285 Ga. 541, 678 S.E.2d 900 (2009). Restaurant was robbed, the restaurant’s manager was fatally shot, and the manager’s car was stolen. As the defendant’s accomplice, the defendant’s cellmate, and an officer testified that the defendant admitted committing the murder, the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of malice murder, armed robbery, and theft by taking. Patterson v. State, 285 Ga. 597, 679 S.E.2d 716 (2009), cert. denied, 558 U.S. 1117, 130 S. Ct. 1051, 175 L. Ed. 2d 892 (2010). Evidence that the defendant committed 16-8-41 an armed robbery was not based solely on the uncorroborated testimony of the defendant’s accomplice. A store employee corroborated the accomplice’s testimony, and items similar to those taken during the robbery, as well as items taken during a later robbery, were recovered from the defendant’s car, which was occupied by the defendant and the accomplice. Savage v. State, 298 Ga. App. 350, 679 S.E.2d 734 (2009). Evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of armed robbery, kidnapping, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony as a party under O.C.G.A. § 16-2-20(b)(3). It was undisputed that the defendant’s sibling committed the acts in question, and the evidence showed that the defendant drove with the sibling to the place the sibling planned to rob, waited for the sibling at the sibling’s instructions until the sibling returned with the fruits of the crime and the weapon, and then tried to drive away. McGordon v. State, 298 Ga. App. 161, 679 S.E.2d 743 (2009). Sufficient evidence supported the defendant’s convictions for armed robbery and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, in violation of O.C.G.A. §§ 16-8-41(a) and 16-11-106(b)(1), as a victim who was robbed at gunpoint by two assailants identified the defendant as one of the assailants; the victim had been walking on a college campus when the two assailants approached, held a gun on the victim, and searched the victim’s backpack before fleeing with the victim’s wallet. Ware v. State, 298 Ga. App. 232, 679 S.E.2d 797 (2009). Evidence was sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions of armed robbery because three other participants in the robbery testified and confirmed that the defendant planned and participated in the robbery and shared in the money taken from the victims; further, the defendant gave a statement to an officer in which the defendant admitted to being at the scene at the time of the crime, but alleged the defendant was only there to sell drugs to the other participants in the armed robbery and was unaware that the others intended to commit a robbery. Brown v. State, 298 Ga. App. 226, 679 S.E.2d 808 (2009). 425 Application (Cont’d) Sufficient evidence supported the defendant’s armed robbery and aggravated assault convictions because the victim recognized the defendant as one of the men who, while armed with a gun, pushed their way into the victim’s home, pushed the victim down, and demanded money when a mask the defendant was wearing fell down; the victim also identified the defendant from earlier occasions when the defendant was visiting the victim’s neighborhood. Dubose v. State, 298 Ga. App. 335, 680 S.E.2d 193 (2009). Evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of armed robbery and kidnapping as a store clerk testified that the defendant, brandishing a knife, ordered the clerk to open the cash register; that the defendant took money from the register; that the defendant forced the clerk into a bathroom, blocked the door with boxes, and fled. Further, both the clerk and a customer identified the defendant from a photo lineup and at trial. Hill v. State, 298 Ga. App. 677, 680 S.E.2d 702 (2009). Evidence was sufficient to support convictions for aggravated assault, aggravated battery, armed robbery, and kidnapping. The victims’ in-court identifications of the defendant and the codefendant were buttressed by the evidence that a cell phone in their possession matched that taken from the victims, that a car of the type used by the robbers contained guns similar to those used in the robbery, and the fact that the codefendant had a key to that car. Wright v. State, 300 Ga. App. 32, 684 S.E.2d 102 (2009). Evidence adduced was sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty of felony murder, armed robbery, and aggravated assault for attacking six people in a home because one of the victims stated that the victim saw the defendant in the doorway after shots had been fired; whether the deal a codefendant made with the state rendered the codefendant’s testimony biased to a degree that left the codefendant less creditworthy was a determination to be made by the jury. Mikell v. State, 286 Ga. 434, 689 16-8-41 S.E.2d 286, overruled on other grounds, 287 Ga. 338, 698 S.E.2d 301 (2010). Evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict of armed robbery against victim one because the victim testified that the robbers took $47 from the victim’s pocket and that a restaurant bank bag contained both the money for the day and the checks for the day; the jury chose to believe the victim’s testimony. Smith v. State, 302 Ga. App. 222, 690 S.E.2d 867 (2010). Armed robbery by 16 year old defendant. — Since an armed robbery was completed when control of the money in a cash register was ceded to defendant and the other four robbers, the facts were sufficient to indict defendant, who was 16 years old, for armed robbery under O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41(a); therefore, the superior court lacked authority under O.C.G.A. § 15-11-28(b)(2)(B) to transfer the case to a juvenile court. Gutierrez v. State, 306 Ga. App. 371, 702 S.E.2d 642 (2010). Defendant’s armed robbery conviction was upheld based on the defendant’s accomplice’s testimony that the defendant pointed a shotgun at a resident during a robbery and evidence that a shotgun and items taken during the robbery were found in the defendant’s bedroom. Mays v. State, 306 Ga. App. 507, 703 S.E.2d 21 (2010). Evidence at trial was sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions for two counts of armed robbery, in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41(a), and one count of theft by receiving stolen property, in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-8-7(a), because the evidence showed that the defendant admitted to being present at the scene of the armed robberies, a victim identified the defendant in court as the person who robbed the victim at gunpoint, several items belonging to the victims were found in the defendant’s home, the defendant and the defendant’s girlfriend owned vehicles similar to those used in the robberies, and each victim testified that the robber worked in cooperation with an accomplice. Baker v. State, 307 Ga. App. 884, 706 S.E.2d 214 (2011), cert. denied, No. S11C0940, 2011 Ga. LEXIS 517 (Ga. 2011). 426 Evidence was sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction for armed robbery in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41 and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-11-106(b)(1) because even though the defendant was found near a car similar to that involved in the robbery, with a shotgun similar to that used in the attack, and the defendant admitted being present at the scene of the robbery, the victim’s testimony alone was sufficient to authorize the jury’s verdict of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt pursuant to former O.C.G.A. § 24-4-8 (see now O.C.G.A. § 24-14-8). Law v. State, 308 Ga. App. 76, 706 S.E.2d 604 (2011). Evidence from the victim and two eyewitnesses to the armed robbery of the night manager of a shoe store was sufficient to support the defendants’ convictions for armed robbery in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41, along with DNA evidence and the amount of cash recovered from one of the defendants. Flint v. State, 308 Ga. App. 532, 707 S.E.2d 498 (2011). Because there was independent evidence sufficient to corroborate the testimony given by a codefendant, the cumulative evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty of armed robbery; accordingly, counsel’s failure to request a charge on accomplice testimony did not constitute deficient performance. Harris v. State, 308 Ga. App. 456, 707 S.E.2d 878 (2011). Armed robbery of pedestrian. — Evidence was sufficient for the jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of using a handgun to rob each of the victims because on three separate occasions within a three week period, the defendant used a revolver to rob a solitary pedestrian during daylight hours, all in the same part of the city, and at trial, each of the victims identified the defendant as the person who robbed them; after arresting the defendant, officers inventoried the contents of the defendant’s vehicle and found a loaded .38 caliber revolver and a cell phone, and an officer determined that the cell phone belonged to the third victim. Willis v. State, 309 Ga. App. 414, 710 S.E.2d 616 (2011), cert. denied, No. S11C1356, 2012 Ga. LEXIS 70 (Ga. 2012). 16-8-41 Evidence was sufficient to convict a defendant of armed robbery based on the victim’s testimony that the defendant and the defendant’s codefendant approached the victim, asked for cigarettes, pulled a gun on the victim and stuck a gun in the victim’s stomach, then relieved the victim of the victim’s cigarettes and the victim’s wallet with $300 that the victim had just been paid. Scruggs v. State, 309 Ga. App. 569, 711 S.E.2d 86 (2011). Conviction for felony shoplifting appropriate. — Evidence that a defendant concealed a designer handbag and four wallets under a shopping bag and started to leave a department store, and that the defendant then, seeing a security guard had been alerted, concealed the items under a clothing rack, was sufficient to convict the defendant of felony shoplifting in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-8-14(a)(1). Tyner v. State, 313 Ga. App. 557, 722 S.E.2d 177 (2012). Single witness can support robbery conviction. — Evidence was sufficient to sustain the defendant’s convictions for armed robbery, O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41(a), aggravated assault, O.C.G.A. § 16-5-21, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, O.C.G.A. § 16-11-106(b), because the victim testified about the assault and identified the defendant as the person who committed the assault; the competent testimony of even a single witness can be enough to sustain a conviction. Brown v. State, 314 Ga. App. 198, 723 S.E.2d 520 (2012). Conviction when serving as lookout and benefitting from proceeds of crime. — Evidence was sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction for armed robbery because the phone and cash register taken from the immediate presence of the victim was the property of another in that the property belonged to the phone business of the victim’s family. Jackson v. State, 314 Ga. App. 806, 726 S.E.2d 63 (2012). Sufficient evidence showed the defendant committed armed robbery, under O.C.G.A. § 16-8-41(a), because the defendant accompanied a codefendant to a crime scene, acted as a lookout, and shared in the proceeds. Campbell v. State, 314 Ga. App. 299, 724 S.E.2d 24 (2012). 427 Application (Cont’d) Evidence was sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction for armed robbery because an accomplice testified to committing a series of armed robberies and that the defendant had participated by selecting the stores to rob, supplying the gun, acting as the getaway driver, and receiving part of the stolen money; law enforcement officers testified that the accomplice implicated the defendant during an interrogation, and officers found items of clothing matching those worn by the armed robber in the defendant’s hotel room. Williams v. State, 314 Ga. App. 840, 726 S.E.2d 66 (2012). As the first defendant aided and abetted in effecting a plan to steal the victim’s car, and as the second defendant took the victim’s money, the evidence was sufficient to convict both of them of armed robbery, hijacking a motor vehicle, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime under O.C.G.A. §§ 16-5-44.1, 16-8-41(a), 16-11-106. Copeny v.