Yates v. State

Habt, C. J.,

(after stating the facts). The only ground relied upon for a reversal of the judgment is that the evidence is not legally sufficient to support the verdict. It is claimed that Chester Benson was an accomplice in. the theft of the automobile, and that there -is no substantial corroboration of his testimony as required by the statute. .

An accomplice is one who could himself be convicted of the crime charged against the defendant, either as principal or accessory. Henderson v. State, 174 Ark. 835, 297 S. W. 836.

Under the, evidence adduced, the jury might have found that Chester…