
    9770.
    Stuckey v. The State.
    Decided November 16, 1918.
    Accusation of possessing intoxicating liquor; from city court of Dublin—Judge Elynt. April 15,, 1918.
    The defendant was convicted of the offense of having in his possession intoxicating liquors. The State’s witnesses testified, that they found the defendant drunk in his store, and that he had about eight quarts of whisky iu suit-cases on the foot of his “bunk” in the store; that the store was locked; and that there was no one in there except the defendant. The defendant contended, that he was not drunk, but was sick; that he did not own the whisky or kno.w anything about it; and that it was put in his store without his knowledge or consent.
   Harwell, J.

The only question involved was one of fact, which the jury determined. The evidence amply authorized the verdict, which was approved by the trial judge. No error of law appears in the special grounds of the motion for a new trial, and the judgment is

Affirmed.

Broyles, P. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Fred Kea, for plaintiff in error.

S. P. New, solicitor, contra.  