
    20083.
    Craven v. The State.
    Decided December 10, 1929.
    
      W. H. Bedgood, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Wade H. Watson, solicitor, contra.
   Broyles, C. J.

1. In view of the note of the trial judge, the refusal to continue the case was not error.

2. The remaining special ground of the motion for a new trial is without merit.

3. The verdict was amply authorized by the evidence, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.  