Russell v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Russell v. State

168 S.W. 95, 1914 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 625

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Russell v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 71 Tex. Crim. 86 →

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided June 10, 1914·No. No. 3160·Published

Opinion

DAYIDSON, J.

[1] Appellant was convicted of misdemeanor theft. The statement of facts found in the record was not signed [96]*96by the attorneys, nor approved by tbe court. Therefore it cannot be considered.

[2] There is a bill of exceptions in the record also; but this does not show to have been filed in the trial court, although approved by the judge. As these matters are presented, they cannot be considered .by the court, and in their absence the matters urged for reversal cannot be reviewed.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

DAYIDSON, J.

[1] Appellant was convicted of misdemeanor theft. The statement of facts found in the record was not signed [96]*96by the attorneys, nor approved by tbe court. Therefore it cannot be considered.

[2] There is a bill of exceptions in the record also; but this does not show to have been filed in the trial court, although approved by the judge. As these matters are presented, they cannot be considered .by the court, and in their absence the matters urged for reversal cannot be reviewed.

The judgment is affirmed.

Russell v. State, 168 S.W. 95, 1914 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 625 (Tex. 1914).

Pincite

168 S.W. 95 (Russell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.