Smith v. State

On writ of error, we review judgment of conviction of the offense of larceny of hogs.

The only question presented is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. The evidence has been examined and carefully considered. It is conflicting and the jury resolved the conflicts against the accused.

No reversible error is shown. See Hamlin v. State, 80 Fla. 217, 85 Sou. 685; Strobhar v. State, 55 Fla. 167, 47 Sou. 4; Danley v. State, 135 Fla. 28, 184 Sou. 525.

The judgment is affirmed.

So ordered.

Affirmed.

Terrell, Buford and Thomas, J. J., concur. Whitfield, J., concurs in opinion -and judgment.…