
    JOHNSON v. STATE.
    No. 24846.
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Oct. 4, 1950.
    None on appeal for appellant.'
    A. C. Winborn, Crim. Dist. Atty.,-E. T. Branch, Asát; Crim. Dist.- Atty., Houston, George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.
   DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

Rape is the offense; - the punishment, death.

Only one question is presented for review, which is as follows :

Appellant was indicted under the name of George H. Young. Upon arraignment, he suggested that his true name was Edward Exnoal Johnson, Jr. Whereupon, the trial court had the same ñoted upon the minutes of the court, and the indictment was corrected' to so read — that is, a line was drawn through 'the name of George H. Young wherever it appeared in the indictment and the name of Edward Exnoal Johnson, Jh was' Written into the indictment in- place thereof.

In making this change, the allegation' of the indictment that the prosecutrix then and there “not being the wife of the said George Ht -Young” was changed to' read “not being the wife of the said Edward Exnoal Johnson, Jr.” , ,.

Appellant insists that such change amended the indictment as to a matter of substance, which is unauthorized. Branch’s P.C., Sec. 511.

A similar contention was held untenable in Colter v. State, 41 Tex.Cr.R. 78, 51 S.W. 945.

It would be a strange doctrine, indeed, that would authorize an accused, by suggesting his correct name, to vitiate the indictment against him. The statute, Art. 496, C.C.P., authorizing the accused tq suggest that his true name be inserted in an indictment was intended to have no such construction.

No reversible error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the court.  