Thompson v. State

Appellant was convicted of the offense of unlawfully being in possession, etc., of a still, etc., to be used for the purpose of manufacturing prohibited liquor. The issues were simple, and the law governing same was amply, and, so far as we can see, correctly, given to the jury by the court in its oral charge, in connection with the written charges given at appellant’s request. There was no prejudicial error- in refusing to give to the jury the written requested charges discussed in appellant’s brief filed here.

If the said refused charge (referring to any of them) was not misleading, the…