
    16692.
    Wyatt v. The State.
    Decided November 12, 1925.
    Accusation of adultery; from city court of Carrollton—Judge Hood. July 3, 1925.
    
      Beall & Beall, Smith & Millican, J. J. Reese, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Bmmett Smith, solicitor, contra.
   Broyles, C. J.

1. Under repeated decisions of the Supreme Court and of this court the allowance of an amendment to an accusation, over the objections of the accused, is not a ground of a motion for a new trial.

2. Under the facts of the case the denial of the motion for a continuance of the case was not error.

3. None of the other special grounds of the motion for a new trial shows cause for a reversal of the judgment below.

4. The evidence was sufficient to authorize the finding of the jury, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgm&nt affirmed.

Luhe and Bloodworth, JJ., eoneur.  