
    Ernest Harper v. The State.
    No. 8314.
    Decided January 30, 1924.
    Transporting Intoxicating Liquor — Sufficiency of the Evidence — Practice on Appeal — Indictment.
    It is not necessary that the indictment allege that the intoxicating liquor was transported for the purpose of sale, and in the absence of a statement of facts the conviction is sustained. Following Crowley v. State, 93 Texas Crim. Rep., 103, and other cases.
    Appeal from the District Court of Titus. Tried below before the Honorable R. T. Wilkinson.
    Appeal from a conviction of unlawful transportation of intoxicating liquor; penalty, one year imprisonment in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the case.
    No brief on file for appellant.
    
      Tom Garrard and Grover C. Morris, Assistants Attorney General, for the State.
   MORROW, Presiding Judge.

The offense is the unlawful transportation of intoxicating liquor; punishment fixed at confinement in . the penitentiary for a period of one year.

No facts are brought forward for review.

An exception was taken to the sufficiency of the indictment upon the ground that it failed to contain an averment that the intoxicating liquor was transported for sale. Such an averment was not necessary. See Crowley v. State, 92 Texas Crim. Rep., 103; Johnson v. State, 93 Texas Crim. Rep., 150.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.  