
    GOLDSTEIN v. STATE.
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    March 29, 1911.)
    Criminal Law (§ 1159*) — Verdict—Conclusiveness.
    A conviction on conflicting evidence will not be disturbed on appeal.
    [Ed. Note. — Por other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 3074-3083; Dec. Dig. § 1159.*]
    Appeal from Tarrant County Court; R. E. Bratton, Judge.
    Ben Goldstein was convicted of unlawfully carrying a pistol, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   HARPER, J.

Appellant was charged upon information and complaint with the offense of unlawfully carrying a pistol, and upon conviction his punishment was assessed at a fine of $100 and thirty days’ imprisonment ill the county jail.

The only assignment of error is that the-evidence is insufficient to support the judgment. The state proved that a pistol was-taken off of defendant. The defendant offered an explanation which, if true, entitled-him to an acquittal. The state introduced a

■witness to prove the falsity of the explanation. The jury heard the defendant’s explanation of his possession of the pistol, and the state’s testimony. They evidently did not believe the witnesses for defendant, but •did believe the state’s theory. Under these circumstances, we will not disturb the jury’s ■findings.

The judgment is affirmed.  