Transcript of The State of Texas vs. Jack Ruby: Pretrial Hearing on Sanity Trial Setting of June 13th, 1966. Phil Burleson, Sol Dann, Sam Houston Clinton Jr., Joe Tonahill and Emmet Colvin Jr. all spoke in defense of Jack Ruby. Henry Wade, Bill Alexander and James Williamson spoke for the state. Judge Louis T. Holland presiding, in place of Judge Joe B. Brown.Phil Burleson filed a motion to dismiss the 1964 affidavit filed by Jack Ruby's sister Mrs. Eva Grant asking for her brother's sanity to be assessed. Based on that motion, Burleson then asked that there be no sanity hearing. Judge Holland insisted that he was bound to follow the direction of the higher court, which was to resolve the question of Ruby's sanity or insanity by holding a hearing. The defense lawyers began to squabble, Tonahill against Burleson, Dann against Tonahill and also occasionally against Burleson. Henry Wade and Bill Alexander listed other affidavits that also called into question Ruby's mental state and then asserted that they were ready to hold a sanity hearing. The defense claimed doing so would damage Ruby's constitutional rights. At the end of the hearing, Judge Holland ordered both Tonahill and Burleson to be ready for a sanity hearing the following Monday, June 13, 1966.Transcript consists of 40 typed pages of onionskin paper; each page has a printed footer that reads: "Frank Howell, Official Court Reporter, Dallas, Texas". Text on the cover:"No. E 4010-JThe State of Texasvs.Jack RubyIn the Criminal District Court Number Three OfDallas County, TexasPretrial Hearing on Sanity Trial Setting of June 13th, 1966"There is a printed footer that reads as follows:"Frank HowellOfficial Court ReporterDallas, Texas"There is also a black stamp on the bottom center of the cover with the following text: "FILEDJun 21 1966Bill ShawDist. Clerk, Dallas Co., Texas" A handwritten signature [illegible] is next to the stamped word "Deputy".