The defendant was convicted of the offense of larceny from the house. He was convicted solely upon circumstantial testimony. The evidence, while raising a suspicion of his guilt, does not exclude every other reasonable hypothesis than that of guilt. For the reason that the verdict was not authorized by the evidence, it was error to overrule the motion for a new trial.
Judgment reversed.
Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.