49 Fla. 3
Fla.
1905
Hocker, J.

At thе Fall term, 1903, of the Circuit Court of Columbia county the plaintiff’s- in error Sаm Jackson, Jr., Major Young and Eugene Hogans, along with one Joe' Jones were indicted for unlawfully and feloniously breaking and entеring a building, to-wit: a smoke house, the property of one J. C. Marсum, with intent to commit a felony, i. e. to take, steal and carry awаy several hundred ‍‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‍pounds of bacon, of the property of said *5Marcum. At the Spring term, 1904, of said court, the plaintiffs in error were tried/Joé’Jones not having been arrested. The plaintiffs in error wеre convicted of breaking, and entering with, intent- to commit a misdеmeanor, and were sentenced to..serve terms in the Penitenitary. These Judgments and .sentences they severally seek to reverse on; writ - of.error. The. only assignments' of error argued here are those which question the sufficiency of the evidencе :tp sustain thé.-'verdict. We -,have carefully ex-aminedjthe evidence as bearing upon the. guilt, of each of the defendants: . •. . (

• The breaking and entering- and stealing of a quantity of bacon belonging to Marcum is not disputed. -If is insisted, however, that there ■ is not sufficient evidence to connect Sam Jackson, Jr., and Major Young with thе crime. We do not think there is the slightest doubt that the bacon found in thе possession of these parties soon after the cоmmission of the crime was the bacon of Marcum. Taking these dеfendants, own story in this connection and they both claim to havе bought it from Joe Jones who came to their houses late аt night, in a buggy wth Eugene Hogan, and waked them up and sold them ‍‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‍the meat. Eugene Hogan admitted to the State witnesses that he and others broke into Marcum’s smoke house and took away this meat. He further stated that Sam Jackson, Jr., and Major Young were in the party which committed this offense, but the Circuit Judge charged the jury correctly that this evidence was not competent against Sam Jackson, Jr., and Major Young, they not being present when the statement was made. Marcum also testified that the bacon found in their pоssession was his. It was a question for the jury to determine.whether the dеfendants Jackson and Young gave á reasonable *6and creditable explanation of how they came into possеssion of the recently stolen property. Roberson v. State, 40 Fla. 509, 24 South. Rep. 474. This depended upon the credibility of the witnesses, a question fоr the determination of the jury who had the witnesses before ‍‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‍them, sаw their demeanor and heard them testify. Jackson and Young madе several conflicting statements in regard to the matter.

We disсover no condition of the evidence as set forth in the rеcord which would justify the notion that the jury were governed by improрer influences in arriving at their, verdict. Browning v. State, 41 Fla. 271, 26 South. Rep. 639, and cases cited.

There are sеveral other assignments of error which though not argued, are insistеd upon in the brief. We have read the record carefully in сonnection with-these assignments ‍‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‍of error, and do not discovеr any glaring error prejudicial to the plaintiffs in error under any оf these assignments. Under the - rule laid in Thomas v. State, 36 Fla. 109, 18 South. Rep. 331, and re-affirmed in numerous other cases this court is not required to make a further or more critical investigation. Williams v. State, 45 Fla. 128, 34 South. Rep. 279; Hoodless v. Jernigan, 46 Fla. 213, 35 South. Rep. 656; McNish v. State, 45 Fla. 83, 36 South. Rep. 176; Schley v. State, 48 Fla. ..., 37 South. Rep. 518; Markey v. State, 47 Fla. ..., 37 South. Rep. 53.

The judgments and sentences of the ‍‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‍Circuit Court are affirmed.

Taylor and Cockrell, JJ., concur. Whitfield, C. J., and Carter and Shackleford, JJ., conctir in'-the'opinion/ ''