Appellant was convicted of the 1987 murder of a man appellant believed was romantically involved with his wife. 1 On appeal, appellant contests the admission of several items of evidence, and contends his character was impermissibly placed in evidence during the testimony of his wife.
1. The victim’s body was found next to his car on a dirt road in Chatham County. The pathologist who рerformed the autopsy on the
*867
victim testified that a single massive gunshot wound to the side of the face caused massive blood loss and instantaneous death. Appellant’s wife testified that, on thе day of the murder, appellant had accused her of having an affair with the victim and had forced her to call the victim and arrange to meet him. Appellant’s wife drove to the site, with aрpellant lying in the fully-reclined passenger seat of her car. When she parked her car bеhind that of the victim, appellant instructed her to leave the headlights on to keep the viсtim from realizing someone was with her. As appellant exited her car, his wife saw he was armed with а shotgun. As she sat in her car with her head resting on the steering wheel, she heard the two men argue and “hеard a noise.” Appellant returned to her car and told her to drive off. As they left the scene, she saw the victim lying on the ground next to his car. She and appellant returned to their home, where appellant beat her. A friend of appellant testified that appellant told him the day after the murder that he had killed the victim. A former girl friend of appellant testified that appellant had pointed out a service station along 1-95 in Georgia and told her it belonged to the parents of a man he had shot. Expert examination of skin samples containing the entrance and exit wounds revealed that the muzzle of the shotgun was less than three feet from the victim’s face when fired. The evidence was sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find apрellant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of murder.
Jackson v. Virginia,
2. During the course of the trial, appellant unsuсcessfully objected to the admission into evidence of the victim’s bloodied T-shirt, the blood-stained sheet used to cover the victim, blood-stained bags put on the victim’s hands by police investigatоrs, the skin samples from the victim containing the entrance and exit wounds, and several photographs of the victim. He contends the items were erroneously admitted because they were nоt material to the issues at trial, and that their admission was extremely prejudicial to appеllant. We disagree.
“Any evidence is relevant which logically tends to prove or to disprove a material fact which is at issue in the case, and every act or circumstance serving tо elucidate or to throw light upon a material issue or issues is relevant.” [Cits.]
Owens v. State,
3. Appellant contends his character was improperly placed in evidence when, under cross-examination by his attоrney, his wife testified that appellant had been arrested in Maryland shortly before being arrestеd in Florida for the victim’s murder, and that appellant had sexually abused her after she had testified аgainst him in an earlier proceeding. Defense counsel did not voice an objection whеn he elicited the response concerning sexual abuse, thereby waiving error, if any.
Merritt v. State,
Judgment affirmed.
Notes
The crime occurred on November 19, 1987. The Chatham County grand jury refused to indict appеllant for the murder in November 1988, but did return an indictment in October 1991. Appellant’s trial began January 25, 1993, and culminаted on January 28 with a guilty verdict, upon which the trial court sentenced appellant to life imрrisonment. The notice of appeal was filed February 25, and the case was docketed in this court on June 2, 1993. The appeal was submitted for decision on briefs September 8, 1993.