Jordan v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Jordan v. State

363 S.W.2d 476, 1963 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1071

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedJanuary 9, 1963

DocketNo. 35195

StatusPublished

This text of 363 S.W.2d 476 (Jordan v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jordan v. State, 363 S.W.2d 476, 1963 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1071 (Tex. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

McDonald, Judge.

Appellant was convicted for driving a motor vehicle upon a public highway while intoxicated; the punishment was assessed at a fine of $100.00 and confinement in jail for three days.

There are no formal bills of exception; the only statement of facts is on the hearing of the amended motion for new trial, which alleged newly discovered evidence.

In the absence of a statement of facts on the main trial, this Court cannot properly appraise any error based on newly discovered evidence. In Campbell v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 61, 310 S.W.2d 740, it was held;

“This court cannot properly appraise the merits of the claim that new evidence had been discovered, that it was material to the defense, and would probably produce a different result upon another trial, in the absence of the evidence which was heard upon the main trial or a bill of exception certifying that it contains all the evidence introduced on the trial pertaining to the matter complained of. * * * ”

See 5 Tex.Juris. (2d), p. 265, Sec. 167.

Finding no merit in appellant’s contention, the judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI