
    Richard Schurzer v. The State.
    
      No. 734.
    
    
      Decided March 26.
    
    1. Selling Liquor to Minor—Evidence Conflicting.—On a trial for selling liquor to a minor, a conviction will not be disturbed when the evidence is conflicting, if the verdict is sufficiently supported by that in favor of the prosecution.
    2. Exclusion of Evidence—Bill of Exceptions—Practice.—Unless a bill of exceptions be reserved to the exclusion of offered evidence, the ruling will not be revised.
    Appeal from the County Court of Dallas. Tried below before Hon. T. P. Hash, County Judge.
    Appellant was convicted of selling beer to a minor, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $25.
    Ho statement required.
    
      John P. G. Whitehead, for appellant.
    
      Mann Trice, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.
   DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of selling beer to a ■ minor. The evidence fally supports the verdict. It is positively sworn, that the minor purchased the beer from appellant, and that he knew the purchaser was a minor. Appellant testified he did not sell the beer as charged. He is corroborated by another witness in a general way. The jury credited the State’s testimony, and found against appellant. There was no exception reserved to the court’s ruling excluding certain testimony set forth in the motion for new trial. As presented, this supposed error will not be revised.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Judges all present and concurring.  