Clinton v. State

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.

HAWKINS, Judge.

— In our original opinion we ■ inadvertently stated that appellant did not testify. He did testify, claiming that he was so drunk that he had no recollection of being in the store. Our opinion has been corrected in the particular mentioned.

In . his motion for rehearing appellant renews his complaint that the court did not charge on circumstantial evidence.- The breaking of the glass in the door to the store was shown by positive evidence. The night watchman heard the glass break and he telephoned the sheriff. He and the watchman found appellant and his…