¶1 The question of whether there was technically a suspension of the judgment or a suspension of the execution cannot affect the result of this case. The defendant contends that it was a suspended judgment, and if we adopt her contention we have many authorities to the effect that trial judges have the power to suspend judgments upon certain conditions, and to later give them effect upon the breach of condition. S. v. Hilton, 151 N. C., 687; S. v. Sanders, 153 N. C., 624; S. v. Everitt, 164 N. C., 399; S. v. Tripp, 168 N. C., 150.
¶2 The verdict of the jury acquitting the defendant of the sale to Millard Creech was not binding on the judge of the municipal court. It was his right to find the facts in respect to that matter according to his own convictions upon the evidence before him, and not according to the evidence before the jury in Superior Court.
¶3 When judgment is suspended in a criminal action upon good behavior, or other conditions, the proceedings to .ascertain whether the terms have been complied with are addressed to the reasonable discretion of the judge of the court, and do not come within the jury’s-province.
¶4*761 The findings of the judge and his judgment upon them are not reviewable upon appeal unless there is a manifest abuse of such discretion. S. v. Everitt, supra.
¶5 Affirmed.