Walters v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Walters v. State

398 S.W.2d 569, 1966 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 866

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedFebruary 2, 1966

DocketNo. 37860

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 398 S.W.2d 569 (Walters 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

Walters v. State, 398 S.W.2d 569, 1966 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 866 (Tex. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

McDONALD, Presiding Judge.

The offense is burglary with two prior convictions for felonies less than capital; the punishment, confinement for life in the Texas Department of Corrections.

We have before us a statement of facts filed with this Court on November 11, 1965, which is ten months after notice of appeal was given on September 28, 1964. The judgment was rendered on July 9, 1964. There were no extensions of time in which to file the statement of facts. It was approved by counsel for the state and the appellant, but the trial judge did not approve it. Under the law in effect on that date, the statement of facts is not before this Court for review. Art. 759a, Vernon’s Ann. C.C.P.; Mobley v. State, Tex.Cr. App., 366 S.W.2d 558; Hoskins v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 373 S.W.2d 248; Malek v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 385 S.W.2d 389. An appeal is governed by the law in effect on the date of judgment, Holdman v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 399 S.W.2d 361.

The contentions advanced by appellant’s counsel in his brief cannot be appraised in the absence of a statement of facts.

All proceedings appear to be regular. Nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

McDONALD, Presiding Judge.

The offense is burglary with two prior convictions for felonies less than capital; the punishment, confinement for life in the Texas Department of Corrections.

We have before us a statement of facts filed with this Court on November 11, 1965, which is ten months after notice of appeal was given on September 28, 1964. The judgment was rendered on July 9, 1964. There were no extensions of time in which to file the statement of facts. It was approved by counsel for the state and the appellant, but the trial judge did not approve it. Under the law in effect on that date, the statement of facts is not before this Court for review. Art. 759a, Vernon’s Ann. C.C.P.; Mobley v. State, Tex.Cr. App., 366 S.W.2d 558; Hoskins v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 373 S.W.2d 248; Malek v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 385 S.W.2d 389. An appeal is governed by the law in effect on the date of judgment, Holdman v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 399 S.W.2d 361.

The contentions advanced by appellant’s counsel in his brief cannot be appraised in the absence of a statement of facts.

All proceedings appear to be regular. Nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

398 S.W.2d 569, 1966 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walters-v-state-texcrimapp-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack