Court Opinion

ID: 5611958
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-11 04:04:12.007093+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:37:08.140979
License: Public Domain

Broyles, C. J.
1. The court did not err in admitting the physical evidence as complained of in the special ground of the motion for a new trial. This evidence was a circumstance in the case and was admissible for what it was worth.
2. The evidence amply authorized the defendant’s conviction, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

Bonnet & Harrell, for plaintiff in error.
C. E. Hay, solicitor-general, contra.