Scott v. State

ON REHEARING.

March 30, 1921.

LATTIMORE, Judge.

It is urged that we were in error in our disposition of appellant’s complaint, as set forth in his bills of exception Nos. 5 and 9, of the refusal of the trial court to allow the witness Shook to answer, on cross-examination, whether time-checks were not sometimes misplaced and lost and did not show on his books, and that it took months to straighten out such matters,.and that it was probable that appellant could have more time coming than was shown by said books. We repeat that appellant did not claim, while on the witness stand, to have lost any…