¶1 Appellant was found guilty by a jury in the Rush Circuit Court of the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor. He assigns as error-that the verdict of the jury is not sustained by sufficient evidence and that the verdict is contrary to law.
¶2 Appellant certainly is not serious in this appeal. The evidence is not set out in his brief and we are unable to consider the alleged errors.
¶3 Fronczak v. State (1925), 197 Ind. 48, 149 N. E. 725.
¶4 Judgment affirmed.