Cranfill v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Cranfill v. State

189 S.W.2d 482, 189 S.W. 482, 80 Tex. Crim. 292, 1916 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 330

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided November 8, 1916·No. No. 4269.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of selling intoxicating liquors without a license.

Court adjourned on the 29th day of July; the statement of' facts was filed on the 7th day of September. This was clearly beyond the time *293 authorized by law, towit: twenty days in which to file evidence in the County Court. There are quite a number of bills of exception. These were also filed on the 7th of September and can not be considered. Without these matters before the court there is nothing to revise, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of selling intoxicating liquors without a license.

Court adjourned on the 29th day of July; the statement of' facts was filed on the 7th day of September. This was clearly beyond the time *293 authorized by law, towit: twenty days in which to file evidence in the County Court. There are quite a number of bills of exception. These were also filed on the 7th of September and can not be considered. Without these matters before the court there is nothing to revise, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cranfill v. State, 189 S.W.2d 482, 189 S.W. 482, 80 Tex. Crim. 292, 1916 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 330 (Tex. 1916).

Pincite

189 S.W.2d 482 (Cranfill v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related