Court Opinion

ID: 9766609
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 04:54:51.458604+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:24.056866
License: Public Domain

ON appellant’s motion for rehearing
WOODLEY, Judge.
We cannot agree with appellant’s contention that because the contradicting statement of the state’s witness made to counsel for appellant was sworn to, his testimony at the trial was destroyed as a matter of law. It was for the jury to say whether his testimony at the trial was true and showed appellant’s guilt, or whether it should be rejected.
Appellant urges that the court erred in admitting in evidence the prior affidavit of the prosecuting witness made to the county attorney. We need not consider whether or not, after the affidavit of the witness made to appellant’s counsel had been offered, the court erred in ruling that the state would be permitted to offer the affidavit of the witness made to the county attorney. The record shows that appellant’s counsel had full *160opportunity to object when the statement was offered in evidence and read to the jury, but did not do so.
We remain convinced that the jury’s verdict should not be set aside because of insufficient evidence.
Appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.