Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

F. K. BARFIELD v. THE STATE.

Forgery — Statement of Facts — Bills of Exception.

Statement of facts and bills of exception filed too late will not be considered.

HAWKINS, JUDGE. —

Conviction is for passing a forged instrument, punishment being two years in the penitentiary.

The motion for new trial was overruled and notice of appeal given on October 31, 1931. Sixty days were granted in which to file statement of facts and bills of exception. No further extension order appears in the record. If any had been made the time could not have been carried beyond ninety days from the date notice of appeal was given. Article 760, C. C. P. The statement of facts and bills of exception were filed in the trial court on January 30, 1932, which was ninety-one days after notice of appeal. Under the statute neither the statement of facts nor bills of exception may be considered. Many cases will be found collated in note 36, under article 760, Vernon's Ann. Tex. C. C. P. Some of the later cases are McKneely v. State, 110 Tex.Crim. Rep., 10 S.W.2d 544; Owens v. State, 117 Tex.Crim. Rep., 35 S.W.2d 726; Moore v. State (Texas Crim. App.), 37 S.W.2d 746; Loyd v. State, 118 Tex. Crim. 297, 38 S.W.2d 1102.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BARFIELD v. STATE
(Jun 15, 1932)