
    Douglas L. Veasey v. State.
    No. 25622.
    January 16, 1952.
    Rehearing Denied February 20, 1952.
    Appellant’s Second Motion for Rehearing Denied (Without Written Opinion) April 2, 1952.
    Hon. M. L. Cobb, Judge Presiding.
    
      Wm. H. Hamblen, Edna, for appellant.
    
      George P. Blackburn, State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.
   MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is driving while intoxicated; the punishment, a fine of $50.00.

We find the evidence sufficient to support the verdict and proceed to pass upon appellant’s one bill of exception. It recites that appellant objected to the use of the venire on the grounds that he had not been furnished a list thereof prior to the trial and, further, that he objected to the use of the jury selected therefrom for the same reason. We find no certificate of the judge in the bill that the facts which constitute the basis of the objection are true. The mere recitation of an objection in a bill is not sufficient. It, therefore, follows that the bill presents nothing for review. Texas Digest, Crim. Law, 1901 (10)i; Garza v. State, No. 25,510, (page 6, this volume) 246 S.W. 2d 635.

Appellant, in his brief, makes reference to a hearing on motion for new trial. No record of such hearing appears before us.

Finding no reversible error, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

ON appellant’s motion for rehearing.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

In addition to what was said in overruling appellant’s bill of exception relative to the jury panel, we note that this record fails to reflect that any member of the jury which tried this case was selected from the jury panel to which appellant objected. The members of the jury may have been selected from talesmen summoned by the sheriff.

The motion for rehearing is overruled.

Opinion approved by the court.  