THOMPSON v. STATE

(95 South. 917) (1 Div. 463.) THOMPSON v. STATE. (Court of Appeals of Alabama. Nov. 21, 1923. On Rehearing, April 17, 1923.) On Rehearing. Criminal law <&wkey;l 11,1 (5) — Recital in judgment entry that no demand was made for a jury governs evidence in record of demand by one other than defendant. Recital in judgment entry that no jury trial was demanded by the defendant held to govern over evidence in record' that a demand for a jury was made, signed by named pers'on other than defendant, tyithout further designation, and without anything in the .record to disclose who such person was, or whether he had authority to represent the defendant. @£s>For other eases see same"topic and KB1Y-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes Appeal from Circuit Court, Mobile County; Joel W. Goldsby, Judge. Hans Thompson was convicted of an offense, and he appeals. Affirmed. T. J. Touart, of Mobile, for appellant. The defendant was denied a trial by jury, and the judgment should be reversed. Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for the State. No brief reached the Reporter. [MAJORITY — MERRITT, J. PER CURIAM.] MERRITT, J. The defendant in this case was convicted of a violation of the prohibition law, and he appeals. There is no bill o'f exceptions, and the time for filing one has expired. We find no error in the record, and the judgment appealed from is affirmed. Affirmed. On Rehearing. PER CURIAM. Insistence is made on rehearing for the first time that this case should be reversed, because the defendant was denied a jury trial after demand made. The only evidence in the record that such demand was made appears to be signed by T. J. Touart, without further designation, nor does the record disclose that the said Touart had authority to or was in any way representing the" defendant. On the contrary, the judgment entry recites that, “no jury trial having been demanded by the defendant, this cause is tried by the court.” The recitals in the judgment entry, under the facts as appear from this "record, would govern. The application for rehearing is overruled: