Davis v. State
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Beoyies, P. J.
1. When considered in connection with its context, the excerpt from the charge of the court, to which exception was taken, was not erroneous for the reason assigned.
2. The evidence authorized a finding that the storehouse Jin question had been broken into and entered.
3. The verdict was supported by the evidence, and the court did pot' err in refusing a new trial.
' Judgment affirmed.
Bloodworth and Harwell, JJ., concur.
B. N. Poltzclaw, for plaintiff in error. John P. Boss, solicitor-general, contra;'
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 0 cases
No case in this database cites this case.