Court Opinion

ID: 9636154
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 14:18:05.764059+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:09:42.652653
License: Public Domain

ON APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR REHEARING
WOODLEY, Judge.
Appellant’s able and conscientious counsel was appointed by the court to defend him. He testified at the hearing on the motion for new trial that in filing his motion for change of venue he realized it was necessary to secure the signature of two individuals that appellant could not receive a fair trial in Gregg County, and was unable to find anyone who was willing to sign and swear to this statement.
It was this testimony which the original opinion refers to as the “statement of appellant’s counsel.”
Our holding was and is that in the absence of a motion supported by affidavits of two compurgators, as required by the statute, and of evidence in support thereof, the trial court did not err in overruling the motion for change of venue; and that the evidence produced at the hearing of appellant’s motion for new trial, including the testimony of appellant’s counsel, does not show that the trial judge abused his discretion in overruling said motion.
The instant facts are deemed insufficient to show a denial of due process in failing to change venue, within the view of certain members of the Supreme Court of the United States: Shepherd v. Florida, 341 U.S. 50-55, 95 L.Ed. 740.
Appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.