Larry Oldham, therefore, cannot maintain this action as Bowen's assignee because the assignment was void. See, e.g., Sharp v. Fagan , 215 Ga. App. 44, 45-46 (3), 449 S.E.2d 648 (1994) (purported assignment of a right of action for a personal tort is void). 2.
(Citation omitted.) Sharp v. Fagan, 215 Ga. App. 44, 46 (4) ( 449 SE2d 648) (1994). Accord Waszczak v. City of Warner Robins, 221 Ga. App. 528, 530 (2) ( 471 SE2d 572) (1996).
(b) Washington contends that his counsel was ineffective for not choosing to submit a motion pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 ( 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.E.2d 69) (1986). Because Washington failed to supplement the record pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-41 (f) or to obtain sufficient stipulation pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-41 (i), he has not carried his burden to prove the existence of a Batson issue. Love v. State, 205 Ga. App. 27, 28 (1) ( 421 S.E.2d 125) (1992); see Sharp v. Fagan, 215 Ga. App. 44, 44-45 (1) ( 449 S.E.2d 648) (1994). (c) Washington asserts that his counsel was ineffective for not challenging the undercover agent's identification since his main defense was misidentification.
Here, the only information in the record concerning the makeup of the panel from which the jury was struck is Collins' counsel's statement that nine of the twenty-nine jurors were African-American, or thirty-one percent of the panel, and that the State used three of its five strikes on African-Americans, or sixty percent. Pretermitting the issue of whether such a statement is sufficient to perfect the record, see Sharp v. Fagan, 215 Ga. App. 44 (1) ( 449 S.E.2d 648) (1994) and Shaw v. State, 201 Ga. App. 438, 439-440 (1) ( 411 S.E.2d 534) (1991), there is no indication in the record of the makeup of the jury which was actually sworn to try the two defendants, as required for a prima facie showing of racial discrimination. Smith v. State, 231 Ga. App. 677, 683 ( 499 S.E.2d 663) (1998); Love v. State, 205 Ga. App. 27 (1) ( 421 S.E.2d 125) (1992).
For refusal of a charge to constitute error, the charge must be adjusted to the evidence. Sharp v. Fagan, 215 Ga. App. 44, 46 (4) ( 449 S.E.2d 648) (1994). 2. During trial, Pitman testified without objection concerning the origin of the Chevron station's business.
[Cit.]" Sharp v. Fagan, 215 Ga. App. 44, 46 (4) ( 449 S.E.2d 648) (1994). The charge, as requested by the Waszczaks, referred to impeachment by contradictory statements and by disproving facts to which a witness testified.