Durham v. State ( 1919 )

Bloodworth, J.

The motion for a new trial in this case contains the usual general grounds only; there is some evidence to support the verdict, which has the approval of the judge who tried the ease, and this court will not interfere.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Accusation of riot; from city court of Floyd county—Judge Nunnally. May 5, 1919.

Harris & Harris, for plaintiff in error. J. F. Kelly, solicitor, contra.