
    11589.
    JENKINS v. THE STATE.
    Decided July 15, 1920.
    1. A conviction upon an indictment charging possession, custody, and control of intoxicating liquor was authorized by evidence showing that near the house in which the accused lived, and in'a pasture in which he and another person kept their cows and which was under their joint control, two jugs of whisky were found, which the other person testified did not belong to himself.
    2. Objection to the whole when a part is admissible will not require exclusion of testimony.
    Indictment for possession of liquor; from Harris superior court — Judge Howard. May 3, 1920.
    Cited by counsel:
    17 Ga. App. 730 (2).
    
      Hardy & Peavy, for plaintiff in error.
    
      C. F. McLaughlin, solicitor-general, contra.
   Luke, J.

The defendant in this ease was charged with having in his possession intoxicating liquor. The evidence shows that out in a pasture and some 150 yards from his home, two containers were found with whisky in them. The evidence further shows that he and another person had joint control and occupancy of the pasture. The other person testified that the whisky did not belong to him, and the defendant stated that it was not his property.

Some of the testimony that the defendant moved to exclude was clearly admissible, and, his motion being to exclude all of it, it was not error to deny the motion. The evidence authorized the verdict.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.  