Court Opinion

ID: 9643584
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 20:33:32.966774+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:11:01.678988
License: Public Domain

ON APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR REHEARING.
BELCHER, Judge.
Appellant again urges error in that the blood specimen taken from him was not identified as being the same blood analyzed by the chemist, whose findings therefrom were introduced in evidence.
*61In addition to that set forth in our original opinion, we observe that Officer Henry testified that he marked and tagged the tube containing the blood specimen, before it was mailed to Austin. Some credence then should be given his testimony when he was handed a tube on the trial and said that it was the one containing the sample of blood taken from the appellant.
Appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.
Opinion approved by the Court.