Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

111 Tex. Crim. 652

13 S.W.2d 846

Botts v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided February 6, 1929

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1929-02-06

<p>The opinion states the case.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1951

1 state decisions

Relies on 100 Tex. Crim. 626 - Garner v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1929-02-06

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

¶1 The offense is bigamy; the punishment confinement in the penitentiary for five years.

¶2 One question is presented for review. Appellant based his motion for a new trial on newly discovered evidence, and attached thereto a letter claimed to be newly discovered evidence. The motion for a *653 new trial was sworn to before appellant’s attorney. An attorney for the defendant is not authorized to take affidavits to be used in the case in which he represents the defendant. Garner v. State, 272 S. W. 167. It is recited in the order overruling the motion for a new trial that evidence was heard. Such evidence is not brought forward. We must therefore indulge the presumption that the court’s action in overuling the motion was correct, and that the trial court acted upon evidence which was sufficient to justify his action. Sykes v. State, 2 S. W. (2d) 863.

¶3 The judgment is affirmed.

¶4 Affirmed.

¶5 The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.

/111/texcrim/652 · .json · Public domain