Chandler v. Commonwealth

The accused has been convicted of the unlawful .manufacture of ardent spirits under an indictment sufficient in form. He is here relying upon two errors:

First, that the court erred in giving an instruction which reads thus:

“The court instructs the jury that they may consider the fact that the defendant ran when the officers approached the distillery as evidence in determining Ms guilt;” to wMch the court added orally, that “neither the presence of the accused at the still, nor his flight •on the approach of the officers, are of themselves sufficient to convict the accused, but may be…