“The defendant was convicted on circumstantial evidence. The facts proved did not exclude every other reasonable 'hypothesis save that of the guilt of the accused, and the judge erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.” Harris v. State, 28 Ga. App. 24-1 (111 S. E. 214). Penal Code, § 1010.

Judgment reversed.

dissenting. In my opinion the evidence was sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of the defendant’s guilt, and the overruling of the motion for a new trial was not error.