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.B. HARVEY v. THE STATE.

1. — Wilfully Exposing Person — Assignment of Errors — Motion for New Trial.

An assignment of errors has no place in the Court of Criminal Appeals; all errors must be raised in the motion for new trial.

2. — Same — Motion for New Trial — Filing.

Upon appeal it is necessary that the motion for new trial is filed in the court below, otherwise it cannot be considered.

BROOKS, JUDGE.

Appellant was convicted of wilfully exposing his person, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $10.

We find no motion for a new trial in the record. We find an assignment of errors, but an assignment of errors has no place in this court. All errors in the charge must be reserved in a motion for a new trial. The assignment of errors is not filed in the lower court. In the absence of motion for a new trial there is nothing in this record authorizing a review.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

ON REHEARING. October 13, 1909.

BROOKS, JUDGE.

This case was affirmed at the last term of this court, and now comes before us on motion for rehearing.

Appellant contends there is a motion for a new trial in the record. There is an unsigned portion of what purports to be a motion for a new trial, though it does not appear to have been filed and is indexed as an assignment of errors. Unless a motion for new trial is filed it cannot be reviewed by us. The motion for rehearing is accordingly overruled.

Overruled.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HARVEY v. THE STATE
(Jun 19, 1909)