Blackwell, Justice.

Benji Cortez Sanders was tried by a Sumter County jury and convicted of the murder of Sheila Freeman. Sanders appeals, contending that the evidence is legally insufficient to sustain his conviction, that the trial court erred when it denied his motion for a mistrial, and that it erred when it discharged a juror after the trial was underway. Upon our review of the record and briefs, we see no error, and we affirm.1

1. Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence shows that Sanders and Freeman were the parents of a one-year-old girl, and Sanders lived "on and off" with Freeman and their daughter in Americus. Around 2:30 on the morning of April 30, 2002, Freeman called her mother and said that she planned to let Sanders know that he was no longer welcome to stay at her home. About an hour later, Sanders called Freeman's mother and admitted that he and Freeman had "been fighting" and that Freeman was not breathing.

Minutes later, first responders arrived at Freeman's home and found her unresponsive on her bed. Sanders was "very excited," "going from room to room, hitting the walls," and said something about Freeman attacking him. Sanders also spontaneously told police officers at the scene that he had "f***ed up." The medical examiner testified that Freeman had been struck with a blunt object and strangled to death.

Sanders claims that the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction.2 His appellate brief does not explain why he believes this to be so, but at the hearing on his motion for new trial, Sanders noted that there was no evidence of a struggle, asserted that Freeman was too strong to have been strangled to death without a struggle, and speculated that Freeman could have died as the result of choking or sleep apnea. But especially given the testimony from Freeman's mother, the incriminating statements made by Sanders, and the medical evidence of bruising and hemorrhages that was consistent with Freeman having been hit with a blunt object and strangled to death (and that was inconsistent with choking and sleep apnea), the evidence "was sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis other than [Sanders's] guilt and to authorize a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty of the crime[ ] of which he was convicted." Washington v. State, 294 Ga. 560, 563, 755 S.E.2d 160 (2014) (citing Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (III) (B), 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)).

2. Sanders claims that the trial court erred when it denied his motion for mistrial based on pre-trial publicity. According to Sanders, the jury was biased against him because some of the jurors had seen a front-page article in the local newspaper about his trial. The article quoted Freeman's mother, who said that Sanders had a history of abusing Freeman.

The trial court, however, allowed Sanders to ask the prospective jurors about the article, and the trial court was "satisfied from the responses given ... of ... their commitment to render a verdict based solely on the evidence presented at trial." Sanders can only speculate that the prospective jurors were influenced by the article despite their assertions to the contrary, and he has not shown "that any publicity was factually incorrect, inflammatory, or reflective of an atmosphere of hostility" or that he could not receive a fair trial. Eckman v. State, 274 Ga. 63, 68, 548 S.E.2d 310 (2001). As a result, the trial court did not err when it denied his motion. See id. See also Ellington v. State, 292 Ga. 109, 140 (8) (b), 735 S.E.2d 736 (2012) ("[a] conclusion on an issue of juror bias is based on findings of demeanor and credibility which are peculiarly in the trial court's province, and those findings are to be given deference") (citation omitted).

3. Finally, Sanders contends that the trial court erroneously discharged a juror after the trial had begun. The record does not reveal why the juror was excused,3 but it is clear that the trial court announced its intention to excuse the juror in open court, and Sanders offered no objection even when the trial court specifically asked him if there was any matter that needed to be addressed before the jury was brought back into the courtroom. Sanders failed to object when the trial court excused the juror, and he cannot be heard to complain about it on appeal. See Hudson v. State, 250 Ga. 479, 484 (3) (b), 299 S.E.2d 531 (1983) ("no objection was made to the dismissal of the juror at trial. Errors not objected to at trial will not be entertained by this court on appeal.") (citation omitted). See also Ensley v. State, 294 Ga. 200, 203, 751 S.E.2d 396 (2013) (where appellant did not object to juror's continued service, "he has thus waived appellate review of the alleged impropriety. In any event, the trial court is vested with discretion to discharge a juror under OCGA § 15-12-172.") (citations omitted).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.