Court Opinion

ID: 9678304
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 06:16:27.10106+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:03.420999
License: Public Domain

ON REHEARING
BOWEN W. SIMMONS, Supernumerary Circuit Judge.
The record does not support appellant’s contention that he was financially improverished to the extent that he could not have employed counsel to obtain a preliminary hearing between the abortive waiver, supra, and the return of the indictment on May 15, 1972.
The record discloses that he talked with an attorney about his case prior to the attempted waiver; that when this conversation with the attorney took place, he had $70.00 on his person. Appellant, a single person until about June 14, 1972, testified that he was working 40 to 42 hours per week and making $2.25 per hour. He elected to prefer payment of some contractual obligations over the employment of an attorney to represent him on the preliminary before or after the so called waiver.
Besides, appellant’s contention that he might have perpetuated at a preliminary hearing the testimony of a witness to the shooting, namely, the grandmother of the assaulted victim, is not necessarily a disadvantage. The testimony does not indicate that the witness, who died, would have testified favorably for him. What the witness would have sworn at such preliminary is entirely speculative.
Under the circumstances, we are unwilling to grant this rehearing. We overrule the application therefor.
The foregoing was prepared by Hon. BOWEN W. SIMMONS, Supernumerary Circuit Judge, serving as a judge of this *308Court under § 2 of Act No. 288, July 7, 1945, as amended; his decision is hereby adopted as that of the Court.
Application for rehearing overruled.
Opinion extended.
All the Judges concur.