Defendant Thompson appeals his conviction of two counts of the offense of armed robbery, five counts of the offense of aggravated assault, and one count of the offense of possession of a sawed-off shotgun. Held:

1. The first enumeration of error alleges violations of the holding in Bruton v. United States, 391 U. S. 123 (88 SC 1620, 20 LE2d 476) in permitting two police detectives to testify concerning statements given by co-defendant Earl, who was tried along with defendant but chose not to testify at trial. However, this issue was not preserved for appellate review by motion or objection at trial. Consequently, we are precluded from reviewing this contention raised for the first time on appeal. Robinson v. State, 173 Ga. App. 260, 261 (3), 262 (325 SE2d 882); Altman v. State, 156 Ga. App. 185, 186 (3), 187 (273 SE2d 923).

2. In his second enumeration of error, defendant maintains that the trial court erred by not requiring the State to properly measure the shotgun as required by law. OCGA 16-11-121 (5) defines a sawed-off shotgun as a shotgun or any weapon made from a shotgun with a barrel less than 18 inches in length or overall length of less than 26 inches. A police detective used a yardstick to measure the length of the barrel of the shotgun in question at less than 13 inches.

Defendant submits Wiley v. State, 204 Ga. App. 881 (420 SE2d 783) as authority that the weapon should have been measured in compliance with the policy and procedures of the "Department of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms." However, as in Wiley the defendant has failed to present evidence as to what those policies and procedures may be and did not mention this issue at trial other than in the course of colloquy concerning the jury charge. As no action or ruling was requested of the trial court, this enumeration of error raises at most a question as to the sufficiency of the evidence concerning the offense of possession of a sawed-off shotgun. We agree with the comments of the trial court that, where it is not a close question, great precision or specific methodology in the measurement of the dimensions of the weapon are not necessary to authorize conviction. As the measurement in the case sub judice indicates that the barrel of the shotgun was at least five inches shorter than permitted, the methodology used by the witness was sufficient to establish that the weapon at issue was a sawed-off shotgun. We also note that the shotgun in question having been introduced into evidence, the issue of its dimensions was one properly for resolution by the jury. Carson v. State, 241 Ga. 622, 625 (3) (247 SE2d 68). The evidence was sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offense of possession of a sawed-off shotgun. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560).

Thomas J. Charron, District Attorney, D. Victor Reynolds, Debra H. Bernes, Nancy I. Jordan, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellee.