Whitman v. State, 316 Ga. App. 655

Whitman was convicted of one count of misdemeanor theft by receiving and appeals the conviction.
Whitman challenges the admission of similar transaction evidence involving a pending theft charge.
The similar transaction occurred May 10, 2011, at a nearby recycling center where Whitman allegedly attempted to sell property stolen the same day.
The State offered the similar transaction evidence to prove intent and course of conduct; the court admitted it for those purposes only.
Whitman’s fiancée testified the September 23, 2010 property came from their yard and not the victim’s stolen items; Whitman did not testify.
The trial court gave a limiting instruction indicating Whitman was on trial only for the charged offense.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether admission of the similar transaction evidence violated Williams three-prong test or was an abuse of discretion	Whitman argues the evidence fails Williams test; admission was an abuse of discretion.	Whitman concedes similarity and that it served proper purposes; argues abuse of discretion standard applies.	No abuse of discretion; Williams test satisfied.
Whether admission of similar transaction evidence impermissibly coerced Whitman to testify or waived his Fifth Amendment rights	Whitman contends it forced a choice between testifying and preserving Fifth Amendment rights in the pending case.	State asserts Whitman could testify but did not; waiver analysis does not compel testimony.	No constitutional violation; admission did not impair Fifth Amendment rights as to collateral matter.
Whether Whitman's decision not to testify affected his ability to present a defense given the similar transaction evidence	Whitman argues limiting evidence affects his right to present defense.	Defense could present other testimony; limiting instruction preserved trial focus on charged offense.	Whitman preserved ability to present defense; no prejudice from the ruling.

Reed v. State, 291 Ga. 10 (2012) (two-prong vs. abuse of discretion standards for similar transaction evidence)
Whitehead v. State, 287 Ga. 242 (2010) (test applies whether similar transaction occurred before or after charged crimes)
Ayiteyfio v. State, 308 Ga. App. 286 (2011) (similar transactions admissible with proper Williams analysis)
Scott v. State, 219 Ga. App. 906 (1996) (similar transaction admissibility framework)
Hill v. State, 298 Ga. App. 677 (2009) (no requirement of related criminal charge for admissibility)
Robinson v. State, 312 Ga. App. 736 (2011) (details of prior arrest admissible when similar to charged conduct)
Woods v. State, 275 Ga. App. 340 (2005) (admissibility of similar transactions depends on Williams test)
Myers v. State, 256 Ga. App. 135 (2002) (witness may testify on direct while asserting privilege on collateral matters)
Buford v. State, 162 Ga. App. 498 (1982) (collateral matters may be protected by Fifth Amendment while testifying)
Carter v. State, 161 Ga. App. 734 (1982) (cross-examination scope includes collateral matters)