
    10149.
    Davis v. The State.
   Luke, J.

In an application for a change of venue, “where the evidence is conflicting upon the, issue .as to whether or not under the petition such a ease is made as requires the judge to grant the motion, the judge hearing the same passes upon the issues that are to he determined upon evidence, . .' and his finding and judgment upon the same is final and controlling, unless manifestly erroneous.” Wilburn v. State, 140 Ga. 138, 141 (78 S. E. 819). See also Park’s Ann. Penal Code, § 964; Coleman v. State, 141 Ga. 737 (82 S. E. 227) ; Bivins v. State, 145 Ga. 416 (89 S. E. 370) ; Marshall v. State, 20 Ga. App. 416, 426, 427 (93 S. E. 98). In the present ease the ■ evidence before the judge of the superior court was conflicting, and it can not be said that it was manifestly erroneous to refuse to grant a change of venue.

Decided January 14, 1919.

Indictment for murder—petition for change of venue; from Burke superior court—Judge Henry C. Hammond. October 3, 1918.

E. K. Overstreet, E. V. Heath, Joseph Law, Archibald Blackshear, C. H. & R. S. Cohen, for plaintiff in error.

A. L. Franklin, solicitor-general, W. H. Davis, H. J. Fullbright, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, C. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.  