Stevens v. State

ON MOTION for rehearing.

MORROW, Presiding Judge. —

The motion for rehearing is limited to the question whether the inspectors of the Liquor Control Board were accomplice witnesses.

Appellant concedes that the purchaser of intoxicating liquor, which is- illegally sold to said purchaser, is not an accomplice witness. See Berlew v. State, 88 Texas Crim. Rep., 241; Privitt v. State, 98 S. W. (2d) 204, 131 Texas Crim. Rep., 342. However, he insists that, under the doctrine of entrapment, the inspectors placed themselves in the category of accomplice witnesses, in that they brought about the…