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

JIM VICTORY v. THE STATE.

Manufacturing Intoxicating Liquor — Bills of Exception.

Where the bills of exception are filed too late to be considered on appeal, and in the absence of the statement of facts, the judgment below must be affirmed.

HAWKINS, JUDGE.

Conviction is for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor, with a penalty of one year in the penitentiary.

No statement of facts appears in the record, and motion is presented by the State to strike out the bills of exception because filed too late. Sixty days after adjournment were allowed to file bills of exception. Adjournment was had on May 27. The sixty days expired on July 26. The bills were not filed until July 28. The State's motion must be sustained. Art. 845 C.C.P.; Martin v. State, 82 Tex.Crim. Rep., 198 S.W. Rep., 149; Jarrott v. State, 84 Tex.Crim. Rep.; 209 S.W. Rep., 663; Farris v. State, 85 Tex.Crim. Rep., 209 S.W. Rep., 665; Darnell v. State, 90 Tex.Crim. Rep., 236 S.W. Rep., 480; Gumm v. State, 92 Tex.Crim. Rep., 241 S.W. Rep., 1023. For other authorities see notes under Art. 845, C.C.P.; Vernon's Civil Criminal Statutes, 1922 Supplement. However, if the bills should be considered they all relate to the question of evidence in some form, and their merit could not be appraised in the absence of a statement of facts.

The judgment is affirmed.

[Motion for rehearing withdrawn by appellant July 20, 1923. Reporter.]

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

VICTORY v. THE STATE
(Apr 25, 1923)