Fitzhugh v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Fitzhugh v. State

160 S.W. 710, 1913 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 737

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided November 12, 1913·Published

Opinion

HARPER, J.

Appellant was convicted of swindling, in an amount less than $50, a misdemeanor.

There is neither a statement of facts nor bills of exception in the record. The only [711]*711ground assigned in the motion for a new trial is, “because the verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence.” In the absence of a statement of facts there is nothing presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

HARPER, J.

Appellant was convicted of swindling, in an amount less than $50, a misdemeanor.

There is neither a statement of facts nor bills of exception in the record. The only [711]*711ground assigned in the motion for a new trial is, “because the verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence.” In the absence of a statement of facts there is nothing presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.

Fitzhugh v. State, 160 S.W. 710, 1913 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 737 (Tex. 1913).

Pincite

160 S.W. 710 (Fitzhugh v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.