
    McCasland v. State.
    (No. 12281.)
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Jan. 30, 1929.
    Kirby, King & Overshiner, of Abilene, for appellant.
    A. A. Dawson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.
   CHRISTIAN, J.

The offense is possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale; the punishment confinement in the penitentiary for one year.

A witness for the state testified that his brother’s children found a jug containing whisky under á culvert. The witness took the whisky to his brother’s house, where he add his brother divided it, each taking more than a quart. Witness carried his part of the whisky to bis own home, which was about a quarter of a mile from his. brother’s home. Appellant claimed the whisky, according to the state’s testimony, stating to the parties who had divided the whisky that he had placed it under the culvert and that it belonged to him.- On Monday appellant recovered one-half gallon of said whisky from one of the parties, and on Tuesday following a ■quart thereof from the other party.

We deem it unnecessary to notice but one question. Appellant timely sought to have the state required to elect the transaction upon which a conviction would be sought, claiming that the testimony developed more than one separate transaction. -We are not in accord with this contention. The whisky found under the culvert and claimed by appellant was the identical whisky recovered by him from the state’s witnesses. Erom the time of the discovery of said whisky until the recovery thereof by appellant, one continuous transaction was involved. There being but one transaction, the doctrine of election had no application.

Finding no error, the judgment is affirmed.

PER OURIAM. The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.  