Moseley v. State

The defendant was convicted of burglary; His motion for new. trial, containing the general and two special grounds was overruled, and he excepted.(a): It is contended that the evidence failed .to show a breaking. ■ A witness for the State testified: “They came in the front door by breaking the glass out and pulling the latch back.” This was sufficient to show that the building was broken into. The further testimony that the defendant took a certain sum of money from an inmate, sleeping in a room adjoining the main room which was broken into, was sufficient to show an entrance. Bloodworth v.…