Hatcher v. State

The defendant was convicted of violating the general prohibition law. It is unnecessary to say that the evidence-in behalf of the State was amply sufficient to authorize the conviction of the defendant; for the general ground of the motion, that the verdict was contrary to the evidence, was practically abandoned *674here. The testimony in behalf of the State was evidently accepted by the jury as the truth of the case, and it demanded a verdict of guilty. The only assignment of error which is strenuously insisted upon here is that the trial judge violated the provisions of section 4334 of the…