
    MITCHELL v. STATE.
    (No. 11809.)
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    May 23, 1928.
    Criminal law <&wkey;l 111 (3) — Bill assigning overruling motion for time to secure counsel presented no ground for reversal, where qualified by statement of counsel’s appointment.
    Bill of exceptions complaining, of overruling of motion for time within which to secure services of counsel and that defendant pleaded guilty on advice of sheriff, held to present no adequate grounds for reversal, where in approving bill court qualified it with statement that attorney was appointed for defendant, and that plea of guilty was entered with his knowledge under formalities and conditions required by statute.
    Appeal from District Court, Shelby County ; R. T. Brown, Judge.
    Curtis Mitchell was convicted for the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    E. J. McLeroy, of Center, for appellant.
    A. A. Dawson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.
   MORROW, P. J.

The offense is the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for one year.

A plea of guilty was entered. No statement of facts is before this court.

Appellant sought a new trial. In the bill complaining of the overruling of the motion, it is set up by way of averment that, upon the calling of his ease, the appellant moved the court to give him time within which to secure the services of counsel ; that, this being denied him, he was advised by the sheriff to enter a plea of guilty and secure the lowest penalty ; that upon such advice he did so. The indictment was returned in February and the trial took place in December following. Tbe motion for new trial was filed some 20 days .after tbe verdict and judgment were rendered. In approving tbe bill tbe court refers to that fact and also qualifies tbe bill with tbe statement that an attorney was appointed fpr tbe appellant and that tbe plea of guilty was entered with tbe knowledge of tbe attorney and under tbe formalities and conditions required by statute. Tbe bill complaining of tbe ruling of tbe court presents no adequate ground for reversal. ■

Tbe judgment is affirmed.  