Hall v. State

Appellant was indicted, tried by the court and convicted of unlawfully transporting intoxicating liquor in violation of Acts 1925, ch. 48, §7, §2720 Burns 1926.

The error assigned and relied upon here is the overruling of appellant’s motion for a new trial, for the alleged reasons that certain evidence admitted was incompetent and that the finding of the court is not sustained by sufficient evidence and is contrary to law.

The evidence for the state (no evidence was introduced by appellant) showed that appellant, William Hinton and Marshall Rowe, at 3 a. m. August 23, 1926, drove through…