
    CARL BURTON et al. v. STATE.
    No. A-3114.
    Opinion Filed November 23, 1918.
    Rehearing Denied April 12. 1919.
    (175 Pac. 941.)
    APPEAL AND ERROR — Intoxicating’ Liquors. Where evidence against eaeli defendant was sufficient to support a conviction for unlawful possession of intoxicating liquors, and there was no defense, and the instructions fairly covered the law of the case, and rulings on evidence were favorable to defendants, and no reversible error appeared, their convictions would be affirmed.
    
      Appeal from County Court, Tulsa County; H. L. Standeven, Judge.
    
    Carl Burton and J. M. Harris were each convicted of having unlawful possession of intoxicating liquors, and punishment fixed' as to Burton at a fine of S50 and imprisonment in the county jail for 30 days, and as to Harris at a fine of $300 and imprisonment in the county jail for a period of 60 days, and each appeals.
    Judgments affirmed.
    
      S. P. Freeling, Atty Gen., and R. McMillan, Asst: Atty. Gen., for the State.
   PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal jointly prosecuted by Carl Burton and J. M. Harris from the county court of Tulsa county, wherein the said plaintiffs in error were each convicted of the crime of unlawful possession of intoxicating liquors and their punishment fixed at the respective fines and imprisonments as above stated. No brief has been filed, nor oral argument presented to this court in behalf of either of said plaintiffs in error. The cause was submitted on a motion of the Attorney General to affirm the judgments for failure to diligently prosecute the appeals.

The record has been examined, and the conclusion is reached that the evidence against each defendant is sufficient to support the convictions; no defense being interposed in the trial court. The instructions given cover the law of the case, and are fair and impartial. The rulings of the trial court on the admission of evidence was favorable to the defendants, and no error is apparent that would authorize this court to reverse the judgments of conviction, and the same are, accordingly, affirmed.  