Court Opinion

ID: 9767302
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 05:16:14.368622+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:30.301494
License: Public Domain

ON appellant’s motion for rehearing
DAVIDSON, Judge.
The witnesses for the state testified that the appellant had on his person a pistol at the time and place mentioned. This testimony made a prima facie case against the appellant. It was not the burden of the state to go further and show that the pistol was a pistol within the meaning of the statute making unlawful the carrying of a pistol.
If the pistol appellant was alleged to have been carrying was not, in fact, such a weapon, the appellant should have so shown as a defense.
The appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.
Opinion approved by the court.