Nelson v. State

142 S.W. 918, 64 Tex. Crim. 489, 1911 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 565
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Nelson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 56 Tex. Crim. 228
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided January 10, 1911·No. No. 1503.·Published

Opinion

HARPER, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of keeping an assignation house, and her punishment assessed at a fine of two hundred dollars and twenty days confinement in the county jail.

There are no bills of exceptions in the record, and the effort of appellant to preserve bills of exceptions in the motion for new trial, reciting therein that appellant had objected .to certain testimony can not be considered. Bills of exceptions must be authenticated by the signature of the trial judge, and a recitation in the motion for a new trial, in the absence of bills of exceptions, will not be reviewed. No *490 special charges were asked, and no exceptions taken to the charge of the court as givenconsequently we can not review the charge. If we did so, it. submits the offense' contained in the indictment in a proper manner.

The evidence amply supports the verdict. F. A. Clay and Albert W. Clay testify positively that appellant is the person to whom the house was rented, and who paid the rent, and the testimony of Officers Peyton, Reed and Graham, and Annie McClerkin make a case. Judgment is affirmed.'

Affirmed.

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

Nelson v. State, 142 S.W. 918, 64 Tex. Crim. 489, 1911 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 565 (Tex. 1911).

142 S.W. 918 (Nelson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.