(Syllabus.)

Appeal and Error — Review — Sufficiency of Evidence to Sustain Conviction. This court will not weigh the evidence nor attempt to pass upon the credibility of the witnesses. Where there is competent evidence in the record proving the commission of the offense and connecting the defendant therewith, and no

Page 153

fundamental errors appear in the record, the cause will be affirmed.

Appeal from County Court, McIntosh County; Horace B. Reubelt, Judge.

Otis Collins and George Scism were convicted of possessing intoxicating liquor, and they appeal. Affirmed as to defendant first named, and reversed as to defendant last named.

Britton H. Tabor, for plaintiffs in error.

The Attorney General, for the State.

CHAPPELL, J. The plaintiffs in error, hereinafter called defendants, were convicted in the county court of McIntosh county on a charge of having possession of intoxicating liquor, to wit, six gallons of whisky, and their punishment fixed at a fine of $50 and confinement in the county jail for a period of 30 days for each of them.

The evidence of the state was that the officers went to the premises occupied by the defendants with a search warrant for the purpose of searching the premises. When the officers reached the house occupied by the defendant Scism, not finding the defendant at home, they tried to serve the copy of the warrant on a daughter of the defendant. She rushed to the back of the house and fired a gun apparently as a signal. The officers immediately left the house and scattered over the premises, and after a short time found a 50-gallon copper still with 6 gallons of whisky, 3 barrels of beer, some empty barrels and jugs. A team was in the orchard near the house with fresh tracks leading from the team to the still, and also fresh tracks leading from the house of the defendant Collins, who lived on the same premises. The evidence of the state further showed that the tracks that led from the team to

Page 154

the still were different from those that led from the home of Collins to the still.

The defendants denied that they were the owners of or in possession of the still, or that they knew anything about the liquor. The court instructed the jury properly on circumstantial evidence.

This court has repeatedly held that, where there is any competent evidence in the record supporting the verdict of the jury, a new trial will not be granted because of insufficient evidence. Adams v. State, 43 Okla. Cr. 179, 277 P. 688; Miller v. State, 43 Okla. Cr. 184, 277 P. 687; Burrows v. State, 43 Okla. Cr. 256, 277 P. 685.

There being competent evidence in the record to support the verdict of the jury, the cause is affirmed.

EDWARDS, P.J., and DAVENPORT, J., concur.

On Rehearing.

CHAPPELL, J. On the 4th day of January, 1930, an opinion was handed down in this case affirming the conviction as to both the defendants. The defendant George Scism has filed a petition for rehearing on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict of the jury as to him.

The petition for rehearing is granted, and, upon a further consideration of the evidence, the court is of the opinion that there is not evidence sufficient in the record to support the verdict of guilty as against the defendant George Scism.

For the reasons stated, the cause is reversed as to him.

EDWARDS, P.J., and DAVENPORT, J., concur.