— THE COURT: You just need to answer the question. JUROR [FIVE]: Yes. On appeal, Moton argues that Juror Five’s initial response to the trial court indicates that the verdict was not unanimous and, therefore, that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury to continue its deliberations. But while not entirely clear, the most logical interpretation of Juror Five’s response to the court’s first question shows that she may not h a single witness is generally sufficient to establish a fact. . . .”). 10 Freeman v. State, 328 Ga. App. 756, 762 (5) (760 SE2d 708) (2014) (punctuation omitted); accord Tew v. State, 320 Ga. App. 127, 127 (739 SE2d 423) (2013). 11 Freeman, 328 Ga. App. at 762 (5) (punctuation omitted); see Graydon v. State, 313 Ga. App. 580, 582 (722 SE2d 173) (2012) (<HOLDING>). 12 McCullough v. State, 317 Ga. App. 853, 853
holding that the district court acted within its discretion when it denied plaintiffs request for counsel holding that there is no indication that the district court abused its discretion in denying the discoverysanction motion holding trial court acted within its discretion in excluding expert testimony holding that trial court erred in denying defendants request to allow standby counsel to conduct voir dire where there was no indication that the trial court considered the koehler factors or that granting the request would have disrupted or delayed the trial holding that trial court acted within its discretion in denying defendants request for firstoffender treatment when there was no indication that trial court refused to consider request or erroneously believed that such was not permitted