1 The crimes occur red on November 10, 2007. On December 18, 2009, appel lant was indict ed by a Cobb County grand jur

y for malice murder , two count s of felony murder based on the underl yi ng feloni es of aggravat ed assaul t and posse ssion of a firea rm by a convict ed felon, four counts of aggravat ed assaul t, a nd two counts of pos sessi on of a fire arm during the comm ission of a crim e. After a jury tri al, appell ant was found guil ty on all c ounts on June 17, 2010. At sent encing on Jul y 13, 2010, appel lant’ s felony murde r convictions w ere vaca te d as a ma tter of la w, an d the tria l court m erged two of h is agg ravate d assa ult convict ions into his malice murder convict ion, mer ged one of his c onvicti ons for aggravat ed assau lt ag ains t Devance int o a second convi ction f or aggravat ed assaul t agai nst Devance, and sentence d him to l ife i n prison f or malic e murder and to consecut ive pri son ter ms of various years for the r emaining convi ctions . See Malcol m v. St ate , 263 Ga. 369 (434 SE2d 479) (1993). Appellant ’s moti on for new tri al was fil ed on July 13, 2010, and denied on Aug ust 28, 2012. His not ice of appealwas filed on Sept ember 12, 2012. The appeal was docketed to the January 2013 term of this Court and submitted for decis ion on the briefs. FINAL C OPY 294 Ga. 610

S14A015 8. JOHNSON v. THE STATE. THOMPSON, Chief Ju stice. Appella ntBrandon Jo hnson was in dicted togeth er with his un cle, Charles Ellery, o n ch arges of

mali ce m

urder, f elony m urder, a ggravat ed assa

ult, an d possess ionof a fire arm du ring the c ommi ssion of a crim e rela

ted to the fata l shootingof Dyke ith Willi ams a nd the shoot

ing of Roderick Devan ce. 1 After a joint jury trial , appe llant was foun d guilty of all charges for wh ich he was in dicted and sent enced

to life in prison. His mo tion for new trial was de nied, and he appeals, assertin g that the trial court erred by fail ing to gra nt his m otion2

for mistrial ma

de after the State

introduced evidence of a sim ilar tr ans action against Ellery. Fin ding no r eversible error , we affirm. 1. As rec ently f

ound by thi s Cou

rt in Ellery v. State , 293 Ga . 881 (750 SE2d 354) (2013), v iewedin the light most favorable to the verdict, the ju ry was authorized to find that [appell ant and Ellery ] went to the a partm ent of Dyke ith Willi ams, ostensiblyto purchase mariju ana. Williams opened th e door to let themin and went int o the kitchen. Williams’ uncle, Rod erick Devance, was in t

he living room wa tching te levision . [Appe llant and Ellery ] nodde d to each

other a nd both of them pulle d guns. [Appellant] went into the kitchen to be wit h Williams; [Ellery] s tayed with Devance in the li ving roo m. [Appellant and Eller y] separately

ordered Willia ms a nd D evanc e to get

on the grou

nd. Devance heard a

shot ring out

from the kitchen; he g rabbed Willia ms’ gun (which was on the sofa) and reached for [Ell ery’ s] gun. At that point, [Ellery] sh ot Devance in the c hest. T hen, trying to put his gu n in his pants, [Ellery] shot himself in the penis. As [appell ant and Ellery] fled the scene, [El lery] threw hi s gun into the hallway and cried ou t, “I'm shot, I' m shot.” Devance struggled into the kit chen to check on Wi lliams, who was lyingface down in a p o ol of bloo d. Devance passed ou t. When police arrived, they found Deva nce and Willia

m s, who wa s dead. Contac t DN A on the ha

ndgun in the

hallwa y ma tched [ Ellery ]’s profile. A c ell phone recovered near t he parking lot belonged to [appellant]

. Id. Devan ce identified app ellan t and Ellery, whom he had k nown previ ously, as the perpetrato rs. We conclude this evidence was sufficient t o enable a rational trier of fact3

to find appellant g uilty beyond a re asonabl e doubt of t he crimes for wh ich he

was convicted. Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC t 2781, 61 L E2d 560) (1979). 2. Inhis sole enumeration o f error, appellan t contends th e trial court erred bydenying

his motion for

mistrial ma

de after the State

introduce d eviden ce of

a similar transaction against Ellery. The decision whether to grant a mistrial is within the discretion o f the trial cour t, and that discr etion will no t be disturb ed

on appeal “unless it is ap parent that a mistri al is e ssential to the p reserva tion of the right to a

fa ir trial.” ( Citati ons and punc tuation o mitte d.) Belton v. State , 270 Ga. 671 , 672 (2) (51 2 SE2d 614) (1999). Given t

he overwhelming evi dence

o f app ellant ’s guilt, includin g Devan ce’s i dentific ation of a ppella nt as the individ ual who entered the apa rtment and shot

Williams and appe llant’s own admis sions that h e and Ell ery we re at W illiam s’ apar

tment , that h e shot Willia ms, and that he dropped his cell phon e while runnin g away, we find that any error in admittin g the similar trans action evidence again st Ellery was harml ess. There fore, t

he grant ing of a mistrial because of the admission of this evidence was not essential to prese rve appell ant’s ri ght to a fa ir trial , and the trial court did n ot abuse its d iscretion in denying the motio n for mistrial. Se e4

Sears v. State , 292 Ga. 64 (3) (734 SE2d 345) (20 12). Judgme nt affir

med. All the

Justice s concur .

Decid ed Februa

ry 24, 201 4. Murder. Cobb Super

ior Court. Before

Judge Bod

iford. Adam M. Hames , for appellant. D

. Victor Reynolds , District Attor ney, Jesse D. Evans, Amelia G. Pray, Assista ntDistrict Attor neys, S amuel S. Olens, Attorn ey General, Patricia B. Attaway Burton, Deputy Attorne y General, Pa

ula K. Smith, Senior A ssistant Attorney General, David A. Bikoff, Assis tant Attorney Gener al , for appellee.