King v. State

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Appellant insists that we erred in upholding the action of the trial court in refusing to grant him a continuance. The rule is too well settled to admit of discussion that when the application shows to be a subsequent one, and there is testimony from other witnesses to the same facts as expected from such absent witness, it will not be held reversible error for such application to be refused and a motion for new trial based thereon, be overruled. There are some exceptions to this rule, but not on facts such as these. We note that appellant had a number…