McDonald v. State

PRENDERGAST, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of seduction and assessed the lowest punishment.

It is useless to detail or discuss the evidence. There can be no question as to its sufficiency to sustain the verdict. ' There was some conflict in the evidence. That of the appellant and his witnesses, if believed, would have been sufficient to have authorized his acquittal. That question was for the jury, however, and not for this court. The prosecutrix was amply corroborated. (Williams v. State, 59 Texas Crim. Rep., 347; Beeson v. State, 60 Texas Crim. Rep., 39; Nash v. State, 61 Texas…