Mays v. State

Appellants were charged with automobile banditry and with being habitual criminals and were convicted after a trial by the court of automobile banditry and acquitted on the habitual criminal charges. They have taken a belated appeal to this court.

Under appellants’ first assigned error that the court erred in overruling their several motions for new trial, appellants contend on this appeal that the evidence was insufficient to support their convictions of automobile banditry.

Appellants, in their brief, admit that the evidence most favorable to appellee, showed that appellants “went over an…