Critzer

Critzer and Hayden were charged with the unlawful possession and unlawful transportation of certain liquor, and in a third count libel was alleged against the automobile used in the transportation of the liquor. Hayden was acquitted, but Critzer was convicted and brought writ of error.

There is no merit in the assignment that the court erred in denying the motion for a directed verdict upon the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence, and made at the close of the testimony of the government. Defendant having introduced testimony after the motion was denied, and not having renewed it at the close of all the evidence, waived the point. Burton v. United States, 142 F. 57 , 73 C. C. A. 243 ; Andrews v. United States, 224 F. 418 , 139 C. C. A. 646 ; Deupree v. United States (C. C. A.) 2 F.(2d) 44 .

Error is assigned upon the denial of defendant’s motion in arrest of judgment. *267 The basis of the motion was that the verdict was inconsistent with'the instructions; that, one defendant having been acquitted, the other should have been, as the instructions of the court were that, in order to find Critzer guilty, it must be found that some relationship existed between Critzer and the…