Court Opinion

ID: 9654111
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 18:06:31.393767+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:29:43.608131
License: Public Domain

ON appellant’s motion for rehearing
WOODLEY, Judge.
The sole question raised on this appeal is the failure of the trial judge to grant appellant’s motion for new trial because of claimed jury misconduct.
The motion for new trial alleging the receipt of other testimony by the jury, after their retirement, and their discussion of certain statements made by the bailiff, is sworn to by appellant. It is not supported by affidavit of any juror or other person in position to have known the facts. Such a motion has been held to be insufficient. See Moore v. State, 155 Texas Cr. Rep. 147, 232 S.W. 2d 711; Henderson v. State, 154 Texas Cr. Rep. 376, 227 S.W. 2d 821; Fielden v. State, 152 Texas Cr. Rep. 597, 216 S.W. 2d 198; Toms v. State, 150 Texas Cr. Rep. 264, 200 S.W. 2d 174.
We disclaim any intent to approve the conduct of the officer in charge of the jury in communicating with a juror regarding the law applicable to the case. We remain convinced, however, that under the facts reversible error is not shown.
Appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.