Case ID: ind_208/html/0561-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Tremain, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mottley v. State of Indiana.
    [No. 26,378.
    Filed July 2, 1935.]
    
      W. W. Martin, and R. W. Armstrong, for appellant.
    
      Philip Lutz, Jr., Attorney-General, and Ralph E. Hanna, Assistant Attorney-General, for appellee.
   Tremain, J.

—The appellant was indicted, tried, and convicted of assault and battery with intent to commit a felony. He was fined in the sum of $225.00 and sentenced to a term of seventy-eight days in the Indiana State Farm. His motion for a new trial was overruled, and he appealed to this court.

In the preparation of his brief he has failed wholly to comply with Clause 5 of Rule 22 (Revised Rules of 1933, Clause 6, Rule 21) of this court, in this: The brief does not contain under the heading “Propositions and Authorities” a copy of each assigned error relied on. No where in the brief is to be found a proposition, point or authority. A condensed recital of the evidence is followed immediately by appellant’s argument. No question is presented for decision.

Because of appellant’s total failure to comply with said rule and present a question for the court’s determination, the appeal is dismissed.