We affirm the final judgment of forfeiture. Although the instructions given to the jury were inconsistent, the practical effect of the instructions was to influence the jury in appellant’s favor, rather than to his injury. See Farish v. Smoot, 58 So.2d 534 (Fla.1952). We find appellant’s second point is without merit and does not warrant discussion.
DOWNEY, GLICKSTEIN and DELL, JJ., concur.