
    NEELY v. STATE.
    No. 22049.
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    April 1, 1942.
    Rehearing Granted April 22, 1942.
    Ennis C. Favors, of Pampa, for appellant.
    Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.
   KRUEGER, Judge.

The conviction is for driving' an automobile upon a public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The penalty assessed is a fine of $200.

The .record is before us without bills of exception or statement :of. facts. In the absence of a statement of facts, we are unable, to appraise the objections addressed to .the charge of. the court.

' No'error having been'presented by the record, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.

On Motion for Rehearing.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

This case was' submitted without the benefit of brief or oral argument, without statement of facts and with a bill of exception which could not be appraised in the absence of statement of fatts. On motion for rehearing, however, our attention has been called for the first time to a defect in the complaint, the jurat to which reads as follows:

“Sworn to and subscribed by J. B. .Wilkinson, a credible person, before me, on this the-day of August, A. D. One Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty-one.
“Joe Gordon
“Gray County, Texas.”

The defect is perfectly apparent. The jurat should have shown the official capacity of the party taking the affidavit and also show its date. The exact question was before this court in Shurbert v. State, 124 Tex.Cr.R. 50, 60 S.W.2d 791, which holding is here followed. See also, Stanley v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 158 S.W.2d 785; Branch’s Ann.P.C. § 480, and authorities there discussed.

The motion for rehearing is granted, the judgment of the trial court is reversed, and the cause remanded.  