See Henderson v. State, 317 Ga. 66, 74 (3), 891 S.E.2d 884 (2023) (noting that "all incriminating evidence is [prejudicial]" and that "[u]nfair prejudice generally refers to the tendency of evidence to lure the factfinder into declaring guilt on a ground different from proof specific to the offense charged, or to suggest decision on an improper basis" (citation and punctuation omitted; emphasis supplied). See also Jackson v. State, 306 Ga. 706, 710 (2), 832 S.E.2d 809 (2019) (holding that certain "evidence was not improper character evidence" but rather "showed [the defendant’s] association with the Bloods and was, therefore, vital to the State’s case regarding the Street Gang Act allegations"); Lupoe v. State, 300 Ga. 233, 245 (8), 794 S.E.2d 67 (2016) (noting that "evidence of [the defendant’s] prior participation in gang activities was directly relevant to an element of the State’s case [regarding a charged Gang Act violation] and did not constitute improper character evidence when admitted for that limited purpose"). And even assuming that Sergeant McKay’s testimony about Appellant’s gang membership somehow suggested that Appellant had a propensity to commit violence, any risk of unfair prejudice from such testimony did not substantially outweigh its probative value.

Based on this evidence, the jury was authorized to find Dixon guilty of the violations of OCGA § 16-15-4 (a) charged in Counts 6, 14, and 16. See Jackson v. State , 306 Ga. 706, 709-710 (1), 832 S.E.2d 809 (2019) (Evidence showing that the defendant shot and killed a rival gang member in retaliation for the victim's having shot at a member of the defendant's gang authorized the jury to find a violation of OCGA § 16-15-4 (a).); Parks v. State , 304 Ga. 313, 316-319 (1) (b), 818 S.E.2d 502 (2018) (Evidence that the defendant and other gang members drove through a neighborhood shouting the gang's name and got out of their cars "trying to fight" the residents authorized the jury to find a violation of OCGA § 16-15-4 (a).); In the Interest of W. B. , 342 Ga. App. 277, 282, 801 S.E.2d 595 (2017) ("Evidence showing that a crime was done in retaliation for some act or insult committed against the gang or its members will also serve to show that the crime furthered the gang's interests."

To convict Jackson, the State had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that: (1) Jackson was associated with the Gangster Disciples; (2) the Gangster Disciples was a "criminal street gang;" (3) Jackson committed the predicate acts of murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon; and (4) the commission of those offenses was intended to further the interests of the Gangster Disciples. See Jackson v. State , 306 Ga. 706, 709 (1) (b), 832 S.E.2d 809 (2019). Regarding the first two elements, Murphy testified that Jackson was a member of the Gangster Disciples, and Investigator Penson testified that Jackson had several tattoos signifying the Gangster Disciples.

Additionally, the jury could infer from the evidence that the crimes were committed with the intent to further the interests of the gang, which is a required showing under the Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act. See, e.g., Jackson v. State , 306 Ga. 706, 709 (1) (b), 832 S.E.2d 809 (2019) (noting that in order to convict the defendant, the State had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was associated with a gang, which was a "criminal street gang," and that he committed the predicate crimes, which were intended to further the interests of the gang). The jury could infer from the evidence of Beamon's association with the "Rolling 20s," his communication with Spencer, who was also a fellow gang member, before and after the murders, and the cell phone records that placed them at the gang house where a "large amount of gang paraphernalia" was discovered on the day of the crimes that the murders were committed in order to obtain status within the gang.

In sum, the trial court's statement about the knife not "matter[ing]," when evaluated in the context of the first instruction and the charge as a whole, did not create a clear and obvious error beyond reasonable dispute with respect to the jury's understanding that it was to consider all of the evidence presented at trial in determining whether Appellant acted in self-defense when he fatally stabbed Harris. See, e.g., Jackson v. State , 306 Ga. 706, 712-713, 832 S.E.2d 809 (2019) (holding that after considering the charge as a whole, the trial court's "unfortunate slip-of-the-tongue" resulting in one improper instruction on malice murder would not have misled or confused the jury and did not amount to plain error); Jackson v. State , 303 Ga. 487, 490, 813 S.E.2d 372 (2018) (concluding that the trial court's failure to give a separate instruction on proximate causation was not an obvious error because the jury charge as a whole adequately instructed on the element of causation for the crimes of which the defendant was convicted); Hood , 303 Ga. at 426, 811 S.E.2d 392 (holding that the alleged errors in jury instructions on justification were not obvious when viewed in light of the instructions as a whole). In support of his argument that the trial court committed plain error by giving the two instructions, Appellant cites several cases in which there was some evidence that a defendant killed a victim in self-defense after they struggled over a weapon.

(Citation and punctuation omitted.) Jackson v. State , 306 Ga. 706, 714 (4) (a), 832 S.E.2d 809 (2019). Appellant has not identified what other motions trial counsel should have filed, nor has he articulated how trial counsel's failure to file additional motions was unreasonable.

"[T]he fact that the jury resolved the conflicts in the evidence or credibility of the witnesses adversely to [Bullard] does not render the evidence insufficient." Jackson v. State , 306 Ga. 706, 708, 832 S.E.2d 809 (2019). We therefore conclude that the evidence presented at trial was more than sufficient to authorize a rational jury to find Bullard guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the violation of the Street Gang Act, as well as for the other crimes for which he was convicted.

The evidence was sufficient to enable a rational trier of fact to find Carter guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crimes of which he was convicted. See Jackson v. State , 306 Ga. 706 (1), 832 S.E.2d 809 (2019) ; Sloans v. State , 304 Ga. 363, 364-365 (1), 818 S.E.2d 596 (2018).Judgment affirmed.

Therefore, the indictment's allegation that Lee participated in gang activity "through" the predicate crimes highlighted the State's burden of showing a nexus or connection between the crimes and Lee's gang and of showing that he committed the crimes with the intent to further his gang's interests. See Jackson v. State, 306 Ga. 706, 712 (3) (b) (832 S.E.2d 809) (2019) (trial court's jury charge "fairly covered the essential elements" of participation in criminal street gang activity, where it explained that the State needed to show that the defendant "conducted or participated in criminal street gang activity through the commission of an actual criminal act," and it defined "criminal street gang activity" as the commission of certain offenses "by a confessed or proven gang member"); see also State v. Thomas, 350 Ga.App. 763, 767 (1) (830 S.E.2d 296) (2019) ("A trial court may cure an erroneous jury instruction by providing the jury with the indictment and instructing the jury that the State was required to prove every material allegation in the indictment and every essential element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt.") (citation and punctuation omitted).

Doing so here, we find that "[n]othing in the omitted material detracted from the [evidence establishing probable cause]." Jackson v. State , 306 Ga. 706, 715 (4) (a), 832 S.E.2d 809 (2019). Even if Tatum's assertions to Long lacked veracity, that does not undermine the fact that the affiant officer himself saw images of child sexual abuse on the Google account, that those images displayed Pickens's face and his distinctive hand tattoo, or that the affiant officer independently confirmed Pickens's identity through means such as social media.