
    16975.
    KING v. THE STATE.
    The jury were authorized to find that there was sufficient corroboration of the testimony of an accomplice, and the conviction of burglary was authorized by the evidence.
    Criminal Law, 17 C. J. p. 271, n. 41.
    Decided March 2, 1926.
    Conviction of burglary; from Chatham superior court—Judge Meldrim. October 5, 1925.
    
      Aaron Kravitch, Gasper Wiseman, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Walter G. Hartridge, solicitor-general, contra.
   Luke, J.

The plaintiff in error contends that the conviction of burglary should not stand because there was not sufficient corroboration of the testimony of an accomplice. The jury were fully authorized to find that there was such corroboration. The judge, having approved the verdict, did not, for any reason pointed out, err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, <7., concur.  