Case ID: sw_288/html/0191-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MORROW, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

GRAY v. STATE.
    (No. 10395.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Nov. 10, 1926.)
    Criminal law <&wkey;1159(3) — Conviction on conflicting evidence is binding on appeal.
    Conviction on conflicting evidence is binding on appeal.
    Appeal from District Court, Stephens County; C. O. Hamlin, Judge.
    Lige Gray was convicted of possessing intoxicating liquor for purpose of sale, and lie appeals.
    Affirmed.
    V. L. Shurtleff, of Breekenridge, for appellant.
    Sam D. Stinson, State’s Atty., of Austin, and Robt. M. Lyles, Asst. State’s Atty., of Groesbeck, for the State.
   MORROW, P. J.

The conviction is for the possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of two years.

The record is without bills of exceptions complaining of the procedure. An examination of the statement of facts discloses that two witnesses testified that the appellant kept and sold intoxicating liquor in his residence. He testified, controverting the truth of the state’s testimony, and introduced some corroborative evidence. The issues having been submitted to the jury in a charge which is not assailed, the verdict, based upon conflicting testimony, is binding upon this court.

The judgment is affirmed.