Mullins v. State

Broyles, C. J.

The defendant was convicted of having, possessing, and controlling intoxicating liquors. The evidence as to her connection with the whisky was entirely circumstantial, and failed* to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of her guilt, and was consistent with the theory of her innocence. The court therefore erred in overruling her motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. George G. Palmer, for plaintiff in error. O. P. McLaughlin, solicitor-general, contra.