Smith v. State

175 S.W. 1063, 76 Tex. Crim. 508, 1915 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 432
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided April 21, 1915·No. No. 3522.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

HARPER, Judge.

Appellant, Ed Shearer and Earl Williams were-jointly indicted, charged with burglary. They were jointly tried, all convicted, and each given eight years in the penitentiary, from which judgment appellant, Lloyd Smith, alone prosecutes an appeal.

The record is before us without any statement of facts or any bills of exception, consequently the only question we can review is whether or not the court erred in refusing a new trial on account of alleged newly discovered testimony. Attached to the motion for a new trial are the affidavits of Hellie Snell and Gertrude Heard. Hellie Snell’s affidavit presents no facts of which appellant must not have been aware as well before as subsequent to the trial, while the affidavit of Gertrude Heard states “that appellant and I remained in his room the balance of the night” after 9 o’clock. If that is true, appellant was as well aware of that fact as was the woman, and in no sense could it be said to be newly discovered testimony.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Smith v. State, 175 S.W. 1063, 76 Tex. Crim. 508, 1915 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 432 (Tex. 1915).

175 S.W. 1063 (Smith v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Seals v. State
634 S.W.2d 899 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1982)