Cantrell v. State

184 S.W. 225, 79 Tex. Crim. 273, 1916 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 114
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided March 22, 1916·No. No. 3998.·Published

Opinion

HARPER, Judge.

This is a misdemeanor conviction. The term of court at which appellant was convicted adjourned November 30, 1915. The statement of facts contained in the record was not approved until January 3, and after being approved on that date was not filed until February 13, 1916, — some eighty-five days after the adjournment of County Court for that term. The bills of exception contained in the record do not show when filed with the clerk of the County Court, but the date of approval by the judge shows they were approved within the time allowed by law in which they could be legally filed. Therefore, the motion of the Assistant Attorney General to strike the statement of facts and bills of exception from the transcript must be sustained. DeFriend v. State, 69 Texas Crim. Rep., 339, 153 S. W. Rep., 881; Durham v. State, 69 Texas Crim. Rep., 71, 155 S. W. Rep., 333.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

DAVIDSON, Judge, absent.

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

Cantrell v. State, 184 S.W. 225, 79 Tex. Crim. 273, 1916 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 114 (Tex. 1916).

184 S.W. 225 (Cantrell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Durham and Harris v. State
155 S.W. 222 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1913)
Stewart v. State
153 S.W. 1150 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1913)
De Friend v. State
153 S.W. 881 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1913)