Patterson v. State

The evidence was somewhat conflicting in this case. The jury believed the witnesses for the State. If their testimony is true, it is sufficient to authorize the finding of the jury; and the trial judge being satisfied with that finding, we cannot say that he committed error in overruling the motion for a new trial upon the ground that the verdict was contrary to the evidence, which was the only ground argued before us for a reversal of his judgment. Judgment affirmed.