Court Opinion

ID: 5615176
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-11 04:15:02.526629+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:37:13.533422
License: Public Domain

Broyles, C. J.
The defendant was convicted of the offense of possessing spirituous liquors, and his motion for a new trial contained only the usual general grounds. The evidence, while circumstantial, was suffi*284cient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of the defendant’s guilt, and the'court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.
Decided May 15, 1923.
W. B. Little, for plaintiff in error.
A. S. Shelton, solicitor-general, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, J.J., concur.