Meads v. State

Broyles, C. J.

Under the particular facts of the ease the jury were authorized to find that the evidence adduced, although circumstantial, was sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of the defendant’s guilt. The cases cited in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error are distinguished by their facts from this case.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. II. A. Boylcin, J. W. Overstreet, for plaintiff in error. J. H. Howard, solicitor, contra.