After conducting a bench trial, the trial court found Appellant Dennis Clemons guilty of the malice murder of Shirley Hunt, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. The trial court entered judgments of conviction on its findings of guilt and sentenced Appellant to life imprisonment for murder and to consecutive five-year terms for the weapons charges. Appellant filed an untimely pro se motion for new trial. After an appearance by new counsel and a hearing, that motion was denied. Appellant subsequently filed a notice of appeal which this Court dismissed. Thereafter, the trial court granted an out-of-time appeal and Appellant timely filed a second notice of appeal.1 1. Construed most strongly in support of the findings of guilt, the evidence shows that Appellant’s wife Dorothy Mae Clemons separated from him on June 28, 2008 and eventually moved in with her sister Ms. Hunt. Appellant was upset, having previously threatened to hunt Ms. Clemons down if she ever left him. On July 31, 2008, Tommy Hampton drove Appellant to the victim’s home for him to drop off some of Ms. Clemons’ mail. Appellant went to the door and entered the house, and gunshots were heard. The victim called her boyfriend, telling him that Appellant had shot her. Appellant left the house without the mail and threatened to kill Hampton and his mother if he said anything about what had happened. Letters to Appellant and his wife were found next to the victim’s body. Appellant owned a 9-mm pistol, and ammunition matching the 9-mm shell casings recovered from the scene was found at his home. During a jail intake interview to assess any special housing needs, Appellant volunteered that he shot the victim because she was meddling in his marriage. Appellant had been convicted of voluntary manslaughter in 1975. The evidence was sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find that Appellant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crimes for which he was convicted. Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U.307 99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560 1979.
2. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in finding that an eight-year-old child who was present at the victim’s home during the shooting was competent to testify. Although the trial court made the standard inquiry to determine the child’s competence as a witness, Appellant “neither requested this inquiry nor objected to the trial court’s determination, and thus waived any objection concerning the child’s competency. Cits.” Kelly v. State , 181 Ga. App. 605, 606 1 353 SE2d 92 1987. See also OCGA § 24-9-7 b; Castillo v. State , 178 Ga. App. 312, 313 4 342 SE2d 782 1986; Keasler v. State , 165 Ga. App. 561 1 301 SE2d 915 1983. Moreover, Appellant argues only that the child did not understand the nature of the oath or the importance of telling the truth. Therefore, Appellant’s “contention .is without merit, as OCGA § 24-9-5 b excepts a child from such a competency challenge. Cit.” Jeffries v. State , 272 Ga. 510, 513 6 530 SE2d 714 2000. See also Norton v. State , 263 Ga. 448, 450 3 435 SE2d 30 1993.
