Case ID: sw_204/html/0335-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "DAVIDSON, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

RAMOS v. STATE.
    (No. 5053.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    May 29, 1918.)
    Criminal Law <§=>1159(3)— Review — Find-ins on Conflicting Evidence.
    The denial by defendant, charged with a violation of the local option law, of the testimony of the state’s witness that he bought a quart and one-half or a quart and a pint of whisky from defendant and paid him $2.75 for it, formed an issue of fact for the jury’s solution, which the Court of Criminal Appeals is not justified in reversing.
    Appeal from Nacogdoches County Court; J. F. Perritte, Judge.
    Didie Ramos was convicted of violating the local option law, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    E. B. Hendricks, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   DAVIDSON, P. J.

Appellant was convicted o'f violating the local option law; his punishment being assessed at a fine of $62.50 and 20 days’ imprisonment in the county jail.

There are no legal questions presented for revision. It is contended, however, that the evidence is not sufficient. The state’s testimony shows a sale by the defendant to the alleged purchaser ' Collins. Collins testified that he bought a quart and a half or a quart and a pint of whisky from appellant and paid him $2.75 for it. Appellant denies the transaction. This formed an issue of fact for solution by the jury. Under this condition of the record we would not feel justified in reversing the case.

The judgment therefore will be affirmed.