Ayers v. State

43 S.W.2d 1097, 119 Tex. Crim. 160, 1931 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 76
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Ayers v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 115 Tex. Crim. 638
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided November 18, 1931·No. No. 14502·Published

Opinion

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for selling intoxicating liquor; punishment, one year in the penitentiary.

There are only two bills of exception in the record, neither of which raises any question of sufficient importance to call for discussion. As we view the record, there was but one issue, viz: the question of guilt under the facts. The state witnesses testified positively to the fact of a sale of whisky. Appellant’s witnesses testified to the contrary. The settlement of conflicts in testimony is for the jury, and unless the record be so devoid of testimony to support the conviction as to lead to the inference of prejudice or unfairness on the part of the jury, it is our rule not to disturb the judgment. Being of opinion there is sufficient evidence in the record to justify the action of the jury, the judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ayers v. State, 43 S.W.2d 1097, 119 Tex. Crim. 160, 1931 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 76 (Tex. 1931).

43 S.W.2d 1097 (Ayers v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.