
    WHITTEN v. STATE.
    (No. 3327.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Nov. 11, 1914.)
    Intoxicating Liqtjobs (§ 146) — Sales—Ojí-EENSES.
    A prospective purchaser told accused that he desired some whisky, and accused replied that he had some in his trunk. Thereupon the purchaser paid him money and went to accused’s home, where another member of accused’s family showed him the trunk containing the whisky from which he took his purchase. Held, that accused was guilty of unlawful sale.
    [Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Intoxicating Liquors, Cent. Dig. §§ 159, 160, 163; Dec. Dig. § 146.]
    Appeal from Red River County Court; Geo. Morrison, Judge.
    Wiley Whitten was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Travis T. Thompson, of Clarksville, for appellant. C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
    
      
      For other oases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dee. Dig. & Am. Dig.'Key-No. Series & Rep’r Indexes
    
   HARPER, J.

Appellant was convicted of violating the prohibition law in force in Red River county.

His contention is that the evidence does not show a sale, in that it does not show a delivery of the whisky by appellant Walter Keeton testified that he knew appellant and approached and told him he desired some whisky. Appellant said that he had some at home in his trunk; that he paid appellant $3 for the whisky, and went) to appellant’s home, and appellant’s brother showed him which was appellant’s trunk, and he went into it and got a quart of whisky. This was a sale, and the court did not err in so holding.

The judgment is affirmed.  