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

HENRY WALKER v. THE STATE.

Theft — Statement of Facts — Filed Too Late — Cannot be Considered.

Where a statement of facts is filed more than ninety days after notice of appeal, it cannot be considered. See Art. 760, C. C. P. 1925.

LATTIMORE, JUDGE. —

Conviction for theft; punishment, two years in the penitentiary.

The record shows that appellant's motion for new trial was overruled July 7, 1928, at which time notice of appeal was given. The statement of facts and bills of exception herein were filed November 1, 1928, this being one hundred and sixteen days after the notice of appeal was given. We pretermit discussion of the validity of any orders extending the time for filing such papers. Under the terms of Art. 760 C. C. P., no time can be given under any circumstances longer than ninety days, save in case of disagreement between counsel and when the statement of facts is prepared by the court. No such facts appear here. The State moves to strike out the statement of facts and bills of exception. The motion is well taken. The indictment correctly charges the theft of property of the value of more than fifty dollars, and is followed by the judgment and sentence.

No error appearing, the judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

WALKER v. STATE
(Feb 27, 1929)