
    16088.
    Farlow v. The State.
    Decided March 3, 1925.
    Accusation of sale of liquor; from city court of Carrollton— Judge Hood. November 13, 1924.
    
      Smith & Millican, for plaintiff in error.
    
      JEmmett Smith, solicitor, contra.
   Bloodwobth, J.

Where the evidence, as in this case, is conflicting, the trial judge has some discretion in setting aside a verdict, but where he has exercised this discretion and there is any evidence to support the verdict, and no error of law was committed, this court has no authority to interfere.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.  