
    REED v. STATE.
    (No. 11625.)
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    May 16, 1928.
    Criminal law <§=>1160 — Motion for new trial on defendant’s affidavit alone' did not justify appellate court in overturning verdict approved by trial court.
    Where new trial was sought on averment of defendant, supported by his affidavit alone, on ground he did not fully comprehend meaning of plea of guilty, and matter set up in motion was in conflict with that given by witnesses for -state, held, that, under circumstances, appellate court was not justified in overturning verdict which had sanction of trial court.
    Appeal from District Court, Waller County; J. L. Manry, Judge.
    Manix Reed was convicted for assault with intent to murder, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    J. E. Edmondson, of.Bellville, for appellant.
    A. A. Dawson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.
   MORROW, P. J.

The offense is assault with intent to murder; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of two years.

The indictment is regular. There are no complaints of the procedure. A new trial was sought upon the averment of the appellant, supported by his affidavit, that he was an ignorant man and did not fully comprehend the meaning of the plea of guilty. It is not claimed that he was misled in any way. 1-Ie admits that the court fully advised him as to the effect of his plea, hut claims that he thought the jury would! have discretion to convict or acquit him. The evidence introduced is sufficient to show that the appellant shot the injured party named in the indictment. No matter is set up in the motion, except that it is claimed therein that the appellant, observing that Bennie Williams was about to shoot another negro, grabbed Williams’ pistol, and a tussle ensued, in which the pistol was accidentally discharged twice and Williams was injured. This testimony is in conflict with that given by the witness who testified upon behalf of the state. The motion for pew trial is supported alone by the appellant’s affidavit, and, under the circumstances stated, was not such as to justify this court in overturning the verdict which has the sanction of the trial court.

The judgment is affirmed. 
      @=For other oases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     