Opinion
No. 19216.
Delivered November 17, 1937.
1. — Argument — Statute.
Permitting county attorney to make a closing argument to jury, after he had made his opening argument and counsel for defendant stated he did not desire to make an argument, held not error under statute.
2. — New Trial — Evidence — Appeal.
In absence of evidence adduced upon trial of criminal prosecution, Court of Criminal Appeals held unable to appraise the matters presented in the motion for new trial.
Appeal from the County Court of Grimes County. Hon. Gerald C. Fahey, Judge.
Appeal from conviction for the unlawful sale of whisky in a dry area; penalty, fine of $100.
Affirmed.
The opinion states the case.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Attorney, of Austin, for the State.
The conviction is for the unlawful sale of whisky in a dry area; penalty assessed at a fine of $100.00.
The complaint and information appear regular. The evidence heard upon the trial is not brought forward for review.
The bill of exception found in the record complains of the fact that the County Attorney made his opening argument to the jury, after which counsel for the appellant stated to the court that he did not desire to make an argument, whereupon the County Attorney then made his closing argument to the jury.
Article 646, C. C. P., 1925, declares:
"The order of argument may be regulated by the presiding judge; but the State's counsel shall have the right to make the concluding address to the jury."
In view of the statute quoted, we fail to perceive any error presented by the bill.
In the absence of the evidence adduced upon the trial, this court is unable to appraise the matters presented in the motion for new trial.
No error appearing justifying a reversal, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Affirmed.