
    Neal McArthur, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Florida, Defendant in Error.
    
    Division A.
    Decision filed November 1, 1928.
    
      L. V. Trueman, for Plaintiff in Error;
    
      Fred H. Davis, Attorney General, and Roy Campbell, Assistant, for the State.
   Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that.the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby reversed on authority of Smith v. State, decided at this term of court.

Ellis, C. J.,.and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur.

Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

Strum, J.

The record shows that our former conviction was for “unlawfully selling liquor.” To warrant conviction as a second offender under Chapter 9266, Acts of 1923, the former conviction must have been either for the offense of manufacturing; selling; possessing for sale or of transporting for sale any intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes. State v. Mayo, 88 Fla. 96; 101 So. R. 228.  