Mathews v. State

Appellant was convicted of the offense of violating the prohibition laws by having certain liquor in his possession. .It would be of no value to discuss the evidence. It was largely, if not entirely, of a circumstantial nature. The question of whether or not it was sufficient to support the verdict returned is not presented, inasmuch as no motion to set aside the verdict was made. There was no error in refusing to give the requested general affirmative charge in appellant’s favor.

This court, speaking through Associate Judge Samford, has recently .said:

“However, we are of the opinion that the…