David Carr was convicted of numerous child-sex offenses involving two sisters who lived in his household. On appeal, he argued that the evidence was insufficient and that several convictions should merge for sentencing. The Court of Appeals of Georgia affirmed most of the convictions after viewing the testimony and other evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict. It held, however, that some convictions arising from closely related acts could not stand as separate sentences because the record did not establish sufficiently distinct criminal transactions. The court directed the trial court to vacate one conviction in each affected group and resentence Carr on the legally permissible counts. The opinion therefore affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded with direction. The court’s analysis distinguishes a challenge to the sufficiency of proof from a merger error that affects the judgment and sentence even when the evidence supports the underlying criminal conduct.