Case ID: sw_181/html/0454-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PRENDERGAST, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

SCOTT v. STATE.
    (No. 3857.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Dec. 22, 1915.)
    Criminal Law <&wkey;1095, 1102 — Record on Appeal — Statement of Facts.
    Without an order authorizing it, statements of facts and bills of exception cannot be filed after the adjournment of the court at which the trial occurred, and, where so filed, motion to strike out should be sustained.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2S47; Dec. Dig. <&wkey;>1095, 1102.]
    Appeal from Newton County Court; W. E. Gray, Judge.
    Charlie Scott was convicted of violating the liquor prohibition law, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    J. B. Forse, of Newton, for appellant. C. O. McDonald, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   PRENDERGAST, P. J.

Appellant was convicted for violating the liquor prohibition law which was in force in said county. His penalty was assessed the lowest prescribed by law for the misdemeanor offense.

The purported statement of facts and bills of exception were all filed after the adjournment of the court at which the trial occurred, and there is no order authorizing this to be done. Under the statute and the many and uniform decisions of this court, the Assistant Attorney General’s motion to strike out and not consider any of them must be, and is, sustained. In the absence of these, no question is raised, which can be reviewed on this appeal.

The judgment is therefore affirmed.