
    HICKS v. STATE.
    (No. 3284.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Oct. 28, 1914.)
    Criminal Daw (§ 1159) — Appeal—Review —Verdicts.
    Where the evidence as to accused’s guilt was conflicting, the question is for the jury, and their verdict cannot be reviewed on appeal.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 3074-3083; 1159.] see Criminal Dec. Dig. §
    Appeal from Tarrant County Court; Jesse M. Brown, Judge.
    Frank Hicks was convicted of wife abandonment and failure to support, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
    
      
      For other oases see same topic and section NUMBER in Deo. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No. Series & Rep’r Indexes
    
   DAVIDSON, J.

Appellant was convicted for the abandonment of his wife and failure to support her.

The testimony for the state is sufficient to support the verdict. The testimony' introduc-eel on tlie part Of appellant refutes the charge in the indictment and contradicts the testimony for the state. This was a matter for the jury, and this court would not feel justified in reversing on account of the conflict in the testimony.

Therefore the judgment will have to be affirmed.  