State v. Loving

Decided July 1, 1856

Texas Supreme Court · decided 1856-07-01

Before the Hon. William S. Todd. Indictment for an affray. Motion to quasi), on the ground that it did not appear from the minutes of the Court, that J. W. Clark, the person appointed by the Court, took the oath prescribed for the foreman of the grand jury.

Relies on Pierce v. State

Decided 1856-07-01

Wheeler, J.

¶1The oath administered to the foreman of the grand jury, is not set out in the record ; nor was it necessary. The record recites that the foreman came forward, together with his fellow jurors, and that they-“were duly sworn as the law prescribes.” This was all the • evidence of the swearing of the jurors which the record need contain. Where the record states that the jurors were duly sworn, the presumption is that the proper oath was administered. (Pierce v. The State, 12 Tex. 210 ; 10 Id. 288.)

¶2The remaining ground of the motion is not supported by the record.

¶3We are of opinion that the Court erred in quashing the in*559dictment; for which the judgment must be reversed and the case remanded.

¶4Reversed and remanded.