Echols v. State

1. Where, upon the trial of one under an accusation in two counts charging him with the retail'sale of “distilled spirits and alcohol” without first obtaining a license from the State Revenue Commissioner, and charging him with the sale of distilled spirits and alcohol on Sunday, the jury returned a general verdict of guilty, but the evidence that the *892defendant sold distilled spirits and alcohol without first obtaining a retail license is entirely circumstantial and insufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis except that he is guilty of that offense, a verdict of guilty of that…