
    (99 South. 156)
    (7 Div. 923.)
    BROWN v. STATE.
    (Court of Appeals of Alabama.
    Feb. 12, 1924.)
    Criminal law <&wkey;i 159(2) — Verdict not disturbed, where evidence from which inference of guilt can be predicated.
    Appellate court is not justified in disturbing verdict of guilty of manufacturing whisky, when there is evidence from which an inference of guilt can be predicated.
    Appeal ' from Circuit Court, Clebourne County; A. P. Agee, Judge.
    Earl Brown was convicted of manufacturing whisky, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
   SAMFORD, J.

Defendant was convicted on a charge of manufacturing whisky, and appeals.

The defendant has had a fair trial before a jury of his peers, who on their oaths say he is guilty. There was evidence from which an inference of guilt could be predicated. When this is the case, the appellate court is not justified in disturbing the verdict.

. There is no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.  