
    
      12236.
    
    Leatherwood v. The State.
    Decided May 11, 1921.
    Indictment for possessing liquor; from Haralson superior court — Judge Irwin. December 28, 1920.
    Jim Leatherwood was convicted on an indictment which charged him with possessing intoxicating liquor. From the evidence it appeared that in grass and weeds and in a smoke-house of the defendant’s father, Parker Leatherwood, in a few steps from the dwelling .of the 'father, with whom the defendant lived, several jugs and jars of whisky were found, covered up. A still, equipped for the making of whisky, with evidences of having been recently-operated, to which a trail led from Parker Leatherwood’s dwelling, was found at a distance of a quarter or half mile, or farther, from that place. Whisky was found along the trail. Other trails led from the still in different directions. A few days before the still was destroyed a brother of Parker Leatherwood was seen going towards Parker Leatherwood’s house with a half-gallon jar under his arm and a sack on his back; a witness supposed that the sack contained bottles; a drink out of the jar was offered to him; he supposed it was whisky, but did not know; he did not taste it. Done of the witnesses saw the defendant or his father at the time of the finding of the whisky. The father was an old and feeble man. The defendant “had been to the war and had been back a short time.” The defendant, in his statement at the trial, said that he was not guilty of the offense charged, that he “ did not make any liquor at the time and place charged,” had nothing to do with it, and knew nothing about it.
   Broyles, C. J.

The verdict was not authorized by the evidence, and the court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

J. M. McBride, Griffith & Matthews, for plaintiff in error.

J. B. Hutcheson, solicitor-general, contra.  