Hackney v. State

68 S.W.2d 495, 125 Tex. Crim. 353, 1934 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 91
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided February 14, 1934·No. No. 16683.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

The offense is burglary; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

The indictment appears regular. The record is before us without statement of facts and bills of exception.

In the absence of the evidence the matters presented in the motion for new trial cannot be appraised.

We have perceived no error in the procedure which would justify a reversal of the judgment. It is therefore affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Hackney v. State, 68 S.W.2d 495, 125 Tex. Crim. 353, 1934 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 91 (Tex. 1934).

68 S.W.2d 495 (Hackney v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tebo v. State
106 S.W.2d 712 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1937)