Legal Opinion

Fitzgerald v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided April 8, 1931No. 14123Published

The opinion states the case.

1Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.

LATTIMORE, Judge.

In his motion for rehearing appellant insists that we erred in holding that the witness Churchill was competent. The complaint directed at the admission of his testimony, as appears in bill of exception No. 5, is very indefinite. The bill states that it was admitted by the state that the witness Churchill had been in the penitentiary. No effort appears in the bill to show when he was convicted, or whether he was unpardoned or otherwise. It is said in Texas Juris, sec. 256, p. 380: “A bill complaining that a witness is disqualified because he had been…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Baxter v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1917
  2. Roach v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1925

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API