
    J. H. McCallister v. The State.
    No. 4513.
    Decided February 24, 1909.
    Carrying Pistol—Intent—Ignorance of Law—Charge of Court.
    Where upon trial of unlawfully carrying a pistol the evidence showed that the defendant had no legal right to carry the same, the court correctly refused a requested charge based upon the defendant’s ignorance of the law.
    Appeal from the County Court of Fisher. Tried below before the Hon. J. E. Barker.
    Appeal from a conviction of unlawfully carrying a pistol; penalty, a fine of $100.
    The opinion states the case.
    No brief on file for appellant.
    
      F. J. McCord, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.
   RAMSEY, Judge.

Appellant was tried on an indictment regularly found by the grand jury charging him with unlawfully carrying on and about his person a pistol in Fisher County. He was convicted and his punishment assessed at a fine of $100.

The evidence is clear and positive that he had a pistol in his buggy some three or four miles from where he lived, and that he was seen to shoot and kill a skunk with it. There is no contradiction of this evidence in the record. The only charge requested by appellant was to the effect in substance that if the jury believed that the defendant at the time he had the pistol believed he had a legal right to carry it, they would acquit him. This is not the law and should not have been given. Hnder the law appellant had no right to carry the pistol at the time and place he had it. He is charged with knowing the law. His belief, however honest or sincere, can not excuse him.

The only other ground raised is, -that the verdict of the jury is contrary to and unsupported by the evidence. This is not sustained by the record. There is no error in the proceedings of the court below, and the judgment is in all things affirmed.

Affirmed.  