1. From the evidence in the record, a rational trier of fact could have found Perez guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979).
2. Perez contends the trial court committed error when it refused to order panels of twelve jurors to be seated in the jury box seriatim. In response to Perez's request to voir dire the jury twelve at a time, the trial court stated "Well, you will have this twelve here, that twelve there and that twelve there." OCGA 15-12-131
provides: "[i]t shall be the duty of the court, upon the request of either party, to place the jurors in the jury box in panels of 12 at a time, so as to facilitate their examination by counsel." There was no reversible error.
3. Perez complains of the admission of pre-autopsy photographs of Mendez as well as of Mendez' blood-stained shirt. The condition of the shirt was considered by a firearms examiner to determine the distance between the handgun and Mendez when the fatal shot was fired, and hence was relevant. The fact that it might be termed "gruesome" does not render it inadmissible. Brown v. State, 250 Ga. 862
, 867 (302 SE2d 347
) (1983). There was no error.