taking only by this first method, i.e., again, an unlawful taking. The trial court did not charge the jury that theft by taking could consist of the unlawful appropriation of property lawfully obtained. Therefore, since both the indictment and the trial court charged theft by taking by the same method, and Frost could not have been convicted of a crime not charged, there was no possibility of a fatal variance between the crime alleged in the indictment and the crime proved at trial. See also Mullen, supra (“the court did not charge the jury that theft by taking could consist of the unlawful appropriation of property lawfully obtained, and thus there is no possibility that the jury based its verdict on that theory rather than the theory alleged in the indictment”). Cf. Robinson v. State (<HOLDING>). Judgment affirmed. Barnes and Mikell, JJ.,
holding that since the court in its charge authorized guilty finding if jury found theft by either method of accomplishment and indictment charged defendant only with first method of taking the court was unable to foreclose the possibility of a fatal variance because the jury could have convicted the appellant of a crime not charged holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to accept the defendants guilty pleas to two counts of the indictment and stating that even if the trial court erred the error had not prejudiced the defendant because he was found guilty by the jury of the charges to which he intended to plead and the evidence of the other crimes would have been admissible in the trial for the first degree murder charge holding that prior convictions relevant only to the sentencing of an offender found guilty of the charged crime do not need to be charged in an indictment or proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt holdingthat an error in instructing the jury that an offense could be committed by a statutory method not charged in the indictment is cured where  the court provides the jury with the indictment and instructs jurors that the burden of proof rests upon the state to prove every material allegation of the indictment and every essential element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt  citation omitted recognizing that before the case was submitted to the jury the trial court charged the jury that if it were unable to reach a unanimous recommendation the court would impose a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole