Adams v. State

252 S.W. 562, 94 Tex. Crim. 636, 1923 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 278
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Adams v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 92 Tex. Crim. 264
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided May 23, 1923·No. No. 7746.·Published

Opinions

HAWKINS, Judge.

The caption to the transcript fails to show when court convened or adjourned. The assistant attorney general has filed a motion asking the dismissal of the appeals because of such omission. The motion must be sustained. - (See Lowrey v. State, 92 Texas Crim. Rep., 311, 244 S. W. Rep., 147; Mendosa v. State, 88 Tex. Cr. Rep., 84, 225 S. W. Rep., 169; Davis v. State, 88 Tex. Cr. Rep., 183, 225 S. W. Rep., 532.)

We find in the record a statement of facts signed by the attorneys and approved by the trial judge, on March 4th, 1923, but it is nowhere made to appear that it was ever filed in the court below. In felony cases the original statement of facts must be forwarded to this court. There are also what purports to be several bills of exception in the record. None of them bear the approval of the trial judge, and the transcript does not show any of them to have been filed in the trial court. We call attention to these matters in order that any errors or omissions may be corrected if appellant should *637 desire the reinstatement of his appeal. The appeal is dismissed

Dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Adams v. State, 252 S.W. 562, 94 Tex. Crim. 636, 1923 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 278 (Tex. 1923).

252 S.W. 562 (Adams v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Davis v. State
225 S.W. 532 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1920)
Mandosa v. State
225 S.W. 169 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1920)
Lowrey v. State
244 S.W. 147 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1922)