Murry v. State

Citations

• 1 Tex. Ct. App. 174

Syllabus

<p>1. Continuance—Diligence.—An application for a continuance, based on the absence of witnesses and alleging the procurement of attachments for them, hut failing to show that the attachments were given or mailed to the proper officer for service, is fatally defective in that it does not show diligence.</p> <p>2. Same—Counter-affidavits.—It seems that the Code of Criminal Procedure has not abrogated the common law practice, on applications for continuances, of hearing counter-affidavits showing want of diligence on the part of the applicant, or that the testimony cannot be obtained. See the opinion in this case for a satisfactory discussion of this question, and of the caution with which the practice should be allowed.</p>