
    DAVIS v. STATE.
    (No. 3398.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Jan. 27, 1915.)
    Ceiminal Law (§ 956*) — Motion fob New Tbial-^Geounds — Disqualification of Ju-eoe — Evidence.
    Denial of motion for new trial on the ground that a juror was not qualified because he had not resided in the county six months, prior to the time he served as juror, not verified or supported by any evidence, presents no error.
    ■ [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2373-2391; Dec. Dig. § 956.*]
    Appeal from Johnson County Court; J. B. Haynes, Judge.
    George Davis was convicted of crime, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   PRENDERGAST, P. J.

Under article 1231, P. C., appellant was convicted for willfully and wantonly killing a cow, and was fined $5i He raises only two questions: First. He claims the evidence is insufficient to sustain the conviction. We have carefully read it, and we think it is sufficient. His other ground is that he claims and alleges in his motion for new .trial that one of .the jurors was not a qualified juror in that he had not resided in Johnson county six months previous to the time he served as a juror. This motion is in no way sworn to hy any one, nor is there any evidence whatever in the record tending to support it. It therefore presents no error.

The judgment is aflirmed.  