Griffin v. State

128 S.W. 1134, 59 Tex. Crim. 424, 1910 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 332
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 25, 1910
DocketNo. 653.
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 128 S.W. 1134 (Griffin v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Griffin v. State, 128 S.W. 1134, 59 Tex. Crim. 424, 1910 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 332 (Tex. 1910).

Opinion

DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of murder in the second degree, his punishment being assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of twenty-five years.

The Assistant Attorney-General moves the court to strike from the record the statement of facts for the reason that same was not filed within the time and under the rules prescribed by the statute. *425 The trial court adjourned on February 25, 1910. The law allowed thirty days in which to file a statement of facts. This would have brought the time up to the 27th of March. There was an order granted by the court dated March 28, 1910, extending the time. This order was entered after the expiration of the thirty days previously mentioned, and came too late. The time allowed had expired, and the order granted was not an extension of time. The time having expired, there was nothing to extend, therefore, the order of the court on the 28th of March extending the time was without authority. Therefore, the statement of facts will not be considered.

There are three bills of exception incorporated in the record. These were all filed on the 21st day of April, the same as was the statement of facts. The same may 'be said in regard to these bills of exception as was said about the statement of facts. These, therefore, can not be considered. The motion of the Assistant Attorney-General to strike from the record and not consider the statement of facts and bills of exception is sustained.

As the record’is presented to the court, with these matters eliminated, there is nothing requiring revision, and the judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Hoskins v. State
373 S.W.2d 248 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1963)
Harwell v. State
197 S.W.2d 349 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1946)
Thomas v. State
164 S.W.2d 852 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1942)
McCleary v. State
36 S.W.2d 166 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1930)
Miller v. State
267 S.W. 487 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1924)
Holcomb v. State
252 S.W. 512 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1923)
Fuston v. State
251 S.W. 1076 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1923)
Wortham v. State
252 S.W. 1063 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1923)
Harr v. State
263 S.W. 1055 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1923)
Jones v. State
255 S.W. 1118 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1923)
Nothaf v. State
239 S.W. 215 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1922)
Hart v. State
218 S.W. 1054 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1920)
White v. State
210 S.W. 200 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1919)
Roberts v. State
136 S.W. 483 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1911)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
128 S.W. 1134, 59 Tex. Crim. 424, 1910 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 332, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/griffin-v-state-texcrimapp-1910.