A jury convicted Timothy Edge of peeping Tom after neighbors described him watching the occupants of a nearby home, including looking through a window in the early morning. After trial, jurors used cell phones during deliberations to view maps or images concerning the distance and orientation of the homes. The Georgia Court of Appeals held that the trial evidence was sufficient, and that testimony about Edge’s prior hostile interactions with the neighbors was admissible to explain the circumstances and motive for the charged conduct. But it reversed the denial of Edge’s motion for a new trial because the State did not overcome the presumption of harm arising from juror misconduct. Several jurors testified that outside information had been shared and discussed, while the juror who successfully retrieved the image was not called to testify. The appellate court held that the record left a reasonable possibility that the misconduct contributed to the verdict. It did not reach ineffective-assistance claims because Edge would receive a new trial.