
    Henry Rowe v. The State.
    No. 9239.
    Delivered November 11, 1925.
    Possession of Intoxicating Liquor — No Bills of Exception — Evidence Sufficient.
    No bills of exception appear in the record. No fundamental errors appear in the charge of the court. The evidence fully supports the conviction, and the judgment is affirmed.
    Appeal from the District Court of Hill County. Tried below before the Hon. Horton B. Porter, Judge.
    Appeal from a conviction for possessing intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale, penalty one year in the penitentiary.
    
      Jerry E. Clarke, for appellant.
    
      Sam D. Stinson, State’s Attorney, and Nat Gentry, Jr., Assistant State’s Attorney, for the State.
   BERRY, Judge.

The appellant was convicted in the District Court of Hill County for the oifense of possession of intoxicating liquor and his punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for a term of one year.

The record is before us without any bills of exceptions. The case has been briefed by counsel for the appellant and complaint is made at the court’s charge. There is no fundamental error found in the charge of the court and nothing before this court in the record that can be considered.

A careful examination of the statement <?f facts convinces us that the appellant’s guilt is shown beyond controversy if the State’s testimony is to be believed. This was a question for the jury to decide, and having decided the issues against the contention of the appellant, we deem it improper to disturb their verdict under the facts of this case.

Finding no error in the record, it is our opinion that the judgment should be in all things affirmed.

Affirmed;

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.  