Sutton v. State

Luke, J.

The evidence connecting the accused with the stealing of the automobile was wholly circumstantial and did not exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of the guilt of the accused; and therefore the court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, O. J.., and Bloodworth, J., concur. Hammond Johnson, Karle Norman, for plaintiff in error, Robert McMillan, solicitor-general, K. D. Kenyon, contra,