
    Joe Tichvocky v. The State.
    No. 9407.
    Delivered November 4, 1925.
    Manufacturing Intoxicating Liquor — Evidence Held Sufficient.
    Where, on a trial for manufacturing intoxicating liquor, the testimony discloses that appellant was caught in the act by officers, and their testimony corroborated by two other witnesses, and no errors appearing in the record, the cause must be affirmed.
    Appeal from the District Court of Gonzales County. Tried below before the Hon. Lester Holt, Judge.
    Appeal from a conviction for manufacturing intoxicating liquor, penalty two years in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the case.
    No brief filed for appellant.
    
      Sam D. Stinson, State’s Attorney, and Nat Gentry, Jr., Assistant State’s Attorney for the State.
   MORROW, Presiding Judge.

The offense is the unlawful manufacture of intoxicating liquor; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of two years.

The State’s testimony is definite to the effect that the appellant was seen by the officers in the act of manufacturing intoxicating liquor; that he fled upon their approach, but was soon afterwards arrested. His identity is definitely vouched for by two witnesses in behalf of the State. Appellant set up an alibi. Upon this issue the decision of the jury is conclusive upon this court. There is nothing in the record suggesting that in the trial of the case the rules of law. and practice were not observed.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.  