Swartz v. State

OPINION

DALLY, Commissioner.

The conviction is for the unlawful sale of marihuana, a narcotic drug. The punishment assessed by the jury was twenty years.

The sufficiency of the evidence is unchallenged.

*207The first ground of error urged by the appellant is that “reversible error was committed when the court restricted appellant’s attorney’s cross-examination of J. M. Canibano, a witness for the State.” This complaint is wholly without merit. The record does not reveal that the trial court in any way restricted appellant’s attorney’s cross-examination.

Appellant’s ground of error no. 2 is that…