Smith v. State

179 S.W. 1165, 78 Tex. Crim. 54, 1915 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 182
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Smith v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 73 Tex. Crim. 273
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided November 3, 1915·No. No. 3776.·Published

Opinion

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant was given a misdemeanor punishment under a felony indictment charging him with theft of personal property.

Motion for a continuance was overruled, and that is assigned as error in the motion for new trial. Appellant failed to reserve a bill of exception, therefore this matter can not be considered. All the other matters in the motion for new trial pertain to the sufficiency of the evidence and matters growing out of the evidence, which can not be considered without the testimony. The record does not contain a statement of facts.

The judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Smith v. State, 179 S.W. 1165, 78 Tex. Crim. 54, 1915 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 182 (Tex. 1915).

179 S.W. 1165 (Smith v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.