Metcalf v. State

244 S.W.2d 818, 156 Tex. Crim. 575, 1952 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1436
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided January 9, 1952·No. No. 25629·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is burglary; the punishment, four years.

No statement of facts accompanies the record.

Bill of Exception No. 1 is to the admission of testimony. There is no showing in the bill as to what the testimony com[576] plained of was. The bill does not show that any objectionable testimony was admitted and, therefore, presents nothing for review. Tex. Dig. Crim. Law 1120(4).

Bill of Exception No. 2 seeks to attack the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict. We cannot pass upon such a bill without a statement of facts.

What we have said in discussing Bill of Exception No. 2 applies to Bill of Exception No. 3, wherein appellant complains of absence of corroboration of the accomplice’s testimony.

Finding no reversible error, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

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

Metcalf v. State, 244 S.W.2d 818, 156 Tex. Crim. 575, 1952 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1436 (Tex. 1952).

244 S.W.2d 818 (Metcalf v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fletcher v. State
282 S.W.2d 230 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1955)