
    Ex Parte J. W. Moore.
    No. 4882.
    Decided January 30, 1918.
    Habeas Corpus—-Rape—Bail—Practice on Appeal.
    Where relator was refused bail under a. charge of rape and appealed to this court, this court after a careful review of the testimony considers him entitled to bail, which' is fixed at $3000.
    Appeal from the District Court of Smith. Tried below before the Hon. J. E. Warren.
    Appeal from a habeas corpus proceeding denying bail.
    The opinion states the ease.
    
      Jones & Jones, for relator.
    On question of bail: Topolanck v. State, 40 Texas, 160; Price v. State, 36 Texas Crim. Rep., 143.
    
      E. B. Hendricks, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
   DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.

Relator applied for a writ of habeas corpus and on the hearing was refused bail under a charge of rape.

The only contention before the court is the sufficiency of the evidence to justify such refusal of bail. It is unnecessary to discuss the evidence. A careful review of it, however, convinces ns that relator is entitled to bail, and that the trial court eTred in refusal of it. The judgment, therefore, will be reversed and bail granted in the sum of three thousand dollars. Upon the giving of proper bond, to be approved by the officer who holds relator in custody, he will be discharged.

The judgment is reversed and bail granted.

Bail granted.  