Burk v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Burk v. State

134 S.W. 705, 1911 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 638

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Burk v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 57 Tex. Crim. 635 →

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided February 15, 1911·Published

Opinion

DAYIDSON, P. J.

This conviction was for robbery; the punishment being assessed at 15 years’ confinement in the penitentiary.

The record is before hs without a statement of the facts or bills of exceptions. The only ground of the motion for new trial is based upon the statement that the verdict and judgment are contrary to law and the evidence. The record, as above stated, being before us without the facts adduced on the trial of the case, this alleged error cannot be reviewed.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

DAYIDSON, P. J.

This conviction was for robbery; the punishment being assessed at 15 years’ confinement in the penitentiary.

The record is before hs without a statement of the facts or bills of exceptions. The only ground of the motion for new trial is based upon the statement that the verdict and judgment are contrary to law and the evidence. The record, as above stated, being before us without the facts adduced on the trial of the case, this alleged error cannot be reviewed.

The judgment is affirmed.

Burk v. State, 134 S.W. 705, 1911 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 638 (Tex. 1911).

Pincite

134 S.W. 705 (Burk v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.