Case ID: ga-app_28/html/0038-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Luke, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

12958.
    GUNTER v. THE STATE.
    A conviction of the offense of manufacturing intoxicating liquor was authorized by the evidence, from which it appeared that the defendant was present with his father and others, eating dinner near a still, while whisky was being made in it, that a barrel containing whisky was at the still, and that the defendant and the others fled at the approach of officers.
    Decided December 15, 1921.
    Indictment for manufacturing intoxicating liquor; from Lincoln superior court — Judge Shurley. September 16, 1921.
    Application for certiorari was denied by the Supreme Court.
    
      C. J. Perryman, for plaintiff in error.
    
      M. L. Felts, solicitor-general, contra.
   Luke, J.

The defendant was jointly indicted with his father and two other persons, for the offense of manufacturing liquor, and was convicted. He complains solely upon the ground that the evidence did not authorize his conviction. The evidence authorized the jury to believe that the defendant was present at a still with his father and two other persons, eating dinner near the still, while there was a ñre in the furnace and whisky was running from the still, that at the still there were about 35 gallons of whisky in a barrel, and that when the officers approached the spot the defendant, his father, and the others fled, and they were later apprehended. We cannot say that the conviction was without evidence to authorize it. The verdict having the approval of the trial judge, it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.