Harris v. State

109 S.W.2d 201, 133 Tex. Crim. 126, 1937 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 447
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 19, 1937
DocketNo. 18951.
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 109 S.W.2d 201 (Harris 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
Harris v. State, 109 S.W.2d 201, 133 Tex. Crim. 126, 1937 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 447 (Tex. 1937).

Opinions

HAWKINS, Judge. —

Conviction is for drunken driving of an automobile on a public highway, punishment assessed at sixty days’ confinement in jail and a fine of $300.00 and appellant was prohibited from , driving a car upon the highways of the State for twelve months.

The statement of facts and transcript were filed in this court on the 30th day of January, 1937, and the case set down for submission on the 14th day of April, 1937. The transcript contains no notice of appeal. On April 13th, the day before submission, appellant’s counsel filed a request for postponement, averring that notice of appeal was given and a docket entry thereof made, but that the order was not carried forward into the court minutes. It is further stated that the next regular term of the trial court does not convene until the first Monday in September, 1937, and we are requested to postpone this case until after said date in order to give opportunity to have notice of appeal entered on the minutes.

Art. 827, C. C. P., provides as follows:

“* * * If notice of appeal is given at the term at which the conviction is had and the same is not entered of record, then by making proof of the fact, the judge of the court trying the cause shall order the same entered of record either in term time or vacation by entering in the minutes of his court an order to that effect. Said entry when so made shall bear date as of date when notice of appeal was actually given in open court.”

In view of the fact that no showing is made of an effort *128 to have the record perfected in vacation* we are not inclined to delay this case until the next term of our court.

The appeal will be dismissed and it is so ordered.

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

Related

King v. State
117 S.W.2d 800 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1938)
Collins v. State
115 S.W.2d 963 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1938)
Schultz v. State
115 S.W.2d 417 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1938)
Griffin v. State
114 S.W.2d 905 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1938)
Wilkerson v. State
113 S.W.2d 535 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1938)
Morris v. State
112 S.W.2d 193 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1938)
Short v. State
111 S.W.2d 713 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1937)
Chaney v. State
112 S.W.2d 464 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
109 S.W.2d 201, 133 Tex. Crim. 126, 1937 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 447, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-state-texcrimapp-1937.