Rowland v. State

1. There was uncontradictcd evidence iu this case that four two-gallon jugs of whisky were found in a hole under the defendant’s residence, and, under all the facts of the ease, the jury were authorized to find against the defendant’s contention that the whisky was “planted,” and this court can not say that the trial judge erred in overruling the general grounds of the motion for a new trial.

2. Grounds 1 and 3 of the amendment to the motion for a new trial can not be considered, for the reason that they are not approved by the trial judge.

3. The State having made a countershowing to the…