
    HOMER THAXTON v. STATE.
    No. A-3297
    Opinion Filed Oct. 4, 1919.
    (183 Pac. 927.)
    INTOXICATING LIQUORS — Unlawful Sale — Evidence. The record in this case ca refully examined, and the evidence, though in conflict, found to sufficiently sustain the verdict of the jury, and that no prejudicial error intervened in trial.
    
      Appeal fmm County Court, Love County; J. H. Hays, Judge.
    
    Homer Thaxton was convicted of violating the prohibitory liquor laws, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      Cameron & Walden, for plaintiff in error.
    
      S. P. Freeling, Atty. Gen., and R. McMillan, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State. -
   ARMSTRONG, J.

The plaintiff in error, Homer Thaxton, hereinafter designated as defendant, was informed against for selling intoxicating liquors, convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of $50, and the costs of this prosecution, and to be imprisoned in the county jail of Love county for 30 days. To reverse the judgment rendered, he prosecutes this appeal.

There is only one question presented by the record, or argued in defendant’s brief — the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction had.

The evidence was in direct conflict, and, as said in defendant’s brief, “The question resolves itself into the proposition as to whom the jury should believe.” This question of fact, the veracity of the witnesses, was within the exclusive province of the jury to determine, and, having determined it, this court, as held by its unbroken line of decisions, will not disturb the verdict rendered, where, as in the instant case, the trial is free from prejudicial error.

The judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed.

DOYLE, P. J., and MATSON, J., concur.  