58 Ga. App. 398 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1938
The defendant was convicted of the offense of possessing whisky. In a ground of his motion for new trial he alleges that the evidence connecting him with the offense charged was wholly circumstantial, and therefore that the court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the law of circumstantial evidence. 'While some of the evidence for the State was circumstantial, two witnesses (the sheriff of the county and his deputy) testified positively that they saw the defendant in possession of a case, twenty-
Judgment affirmed.