Court Opinion

ID: 9642344
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 17:55:31.036128+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:46.364871
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.
BELCHER, Judge.
In his motion for rehearing, appellant insists that the evidence as to who started the altercation, upon which he relies as a basis for self-defense, is uncontradicted and that the jury is not authorized to resolve same against him. The jury is not bound to accept all or any of the testimony of a witness, even though uncontradicted. It is not the prerogative of the appellate court to interfere with the jury’s finding on questions of fact where there is evidence authorizing their verdict. See Williams v. State, 146 Tex. Cr. R. 291, 174 S.W. 2d 261 (5).
Appellant again complains of the use of the word “alias” in the indictment. In addition to what we have heretofore said, we further observe that this contention is set at rest by his failure to suggest the correct name at the proper time in order that his name as suggested might be inserted in the indictment as provided in Arts. 495-496, C.C.P.
After. careful and thorough study of appellant’s able brief and authorities cited therein, we remain convinced that-the correct conclusion was reached in our original opinion. . v •
*247The motion for rehearing is overruled.
Opinion approved by the Court.