King v. State

Luke, J.

The plaintiff in error contends that the conviction of burglary should not stand because there was not sufficient corroboration of the testimony of an accomplice. The jury were fully authorized to find that there was such corroboration. The judge, having approved the verdict, did not, for any reason pointed out, err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, <7., concur.