White v. State

The fact that appellant had been offered a blood test was first injected on the cross-examination of State’s Witness Bur-nip.

This testimony was before the jury and if there was any error in regard to its admissibility, it was waived when no motion to exclude or withdraw the answer was made. Bates v. State, 99 Texas Cr. Rep. 647, 271 S.W. 389; Johnson v. State, 90 Texas Cr. Rep. 229, 234 S.W. 891; Murray v. State, 136 Texas Cr. Rep. 38, 122 S.W. 2d 1119; Lawson v. State, 148 Texas Cr. Rep. 140, 185 S.W. 2d 439; Stanford v. State, 145 Texas Cr. Rep. 306, 167 S.W. 2d 517; Adams v. State, 158…