Freeman v. State

ON REHEARING

March 21, 1923.

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Appellant insists that we erred in not holding erroneous the admission of the testimony of the witness Sherman that appellant ivas drunk on various occasions when he came back from his farm. The charge was the manufacture of intoxicating liquor. The paraphernalia for making such liquor was unquestionably found on the farm of appellant’s wife of which he had charge. It would scarcely need argument to show it would be admissible to prove that other parties who went to appellant’s farm where said still was located, went away in an intoxicated…