
    Wesley Ellis, Johnny Ellis, Roy Gage v. State.
    176 So. 430.
    Division A.
    Opinion Filed October 14, 1937.
    
      
      Martin & Martin, for Plaintiffs, in Error; •
    
      Cary D. Landis, Attorney General, and Tyrus A. Norwoodj Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
   Buford, J.

The only question presented by the brief for plaintiff in error is whether or not the evidence is sufficient tó support-the verdict and judgment.

To detail the testimony of the witnesses as disclosed by • the transcript of the evidence can serve no useful purpose. It is sufficient to- say that there was ample substantial evidence to support the judgment and the jury resolved the conflicts in favor of the State. So the judgment should be affirmed on authority of the opinions and judgments in the cases of Calvin v. State, 62 Fla. 27, 57 Sou. 193; Broxson v. State, 99 Fla. 1187, 128 Sou. 628, and cases there cited.

So ordered.

Affirmed.

Ellis, C. J., and Terrell, J., concur.

Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Chapman, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.  