From a perusal of the record in this case, we conclude that although the circumstantial testimony relied upon for conviction was consistent with the guilt of the appellant, it cannot be said to have been inconsistent with his innocence and to have pointed “ ‘unerringly to the accused’s guilt *487beyond a reasonable doubt.’ ” Raybon v. State, Fla., 75 So.2d 7.

Consequently the judgment is

Reversed.

(dissenting).

I think the evidence in this case is lawfully sufficient to support the verdict and judgment of conviction.

THORNAL, J., concurs.