Taylor v. State

The defendant was indicted, tried, convicted, and sentenced for distilling, making, or manufacturing alcoholic, spirituous, malted, or mixed liquors or beverages contrary to law. The affirmative charge was properly refused to the defendant:. The evidence was in conflict, and the evidence offered by the state, if believed by the jury, was sufficient to warrant a conviction.

In support of the motion for a new trial, the defendant proved by the sheriff of the county that—

“the jury was out in this case about 24 hours; that on the night they were out on said case, while he and they were in the…