Dill v. State ( 1929 )

Broyles, C. J.

1. In the light of all the facts of the case and the notes of the trial judge, none of the special grounds of the motion for a new trial show harmful error.

2. The evidence amply authorized, if it did not demand, the verdict, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworlh, JJ., concur.