Bishop v. State, 314 Ga. App. 830

Bishop was convicted after a jury trial of robbery by intimidation, robbery, terroristic threats, and criminal trespass.
The CVS robbery occurred on September 2, 2008, where the robber jumped the counter, demanded money, and fled with a bag and money while a witness saw a bandage on his arm.
A female customer identified Bishop as the robber who ran out with money and a bandage around the arm; another witness also identified him with the money and bandage.
Evidence showed Bishop had been outside the store earlier and suggested someone else jump-start his car; a separate witness and physical clues linked him to the crime.
During investigation, Police identified Bishop from a photograph lineup; he was arrested the same day.
Bishop challenged the admission of similar transaction evidence linking an Alabama robbery to the CVS robbery, and the trial court’s jury instruction on that evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of similar transaction evidence	Bishop: no notice of what would be admitted; no factual finding of similarity.	State: evidence supported by similarity and proper for common scheme.	Admissible for common scheme/plan; sufficient similarity and identity found.
Charge expansion on similar transaction evidence	Expansion beyond permissible purpose.	No error in jury instructions.	No plain error; instructions not prejudicial.

Williams v. State, 261 Ga. 640 (Ga. 1991) (requires three-showing test for similar transaction evidence under USCR 31.3(B))
Mattox v. State, 287 Ga.App. 280 (Ga. App. 2007) (establishes three affirmative showings and similarity standard)
Woods v. State, 275 Ga.App. 340 (Ga. App. 2005) (prior similar crime admissible when circumstance largely same as current charges)
State v. Kelly, 290 Ga. 29 (Ga. 2011) (plain-error review applies to expansion of similar transaction instructions)
Bellamy v. State, 312 Ga.App. 899 (Ga. App. 2011) (plain-error standard applied to challenged instructions)