Case ID: sw_245/html/0916-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HAWKINS, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HAWKINS v. STATE.
    (No. 7259.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Dec. 13, 1922.)
    Criminal law <&wkey;!099(6) — Statement of facts on appeal, filed within 90 days, will be considered.
    Where accused, sentenced on April 13th on a plea of guilty, was given until May 27th in which to file a statement of facts for appeal, and failed to do so until-July 5th, which was within 80 days of the date of sentence, and there is nothing in the transcript to show at what time the term of court during which he was sentenced adjourned, the appellate court will consider the statement of facts.
    
      Appeal from Criminal District Court, No. 2, •Dallas County; C. A. Pippen, Judge.
    George Hawkins, alias Allen White, was convicted of a crime on a plea of guilty, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   HAWKINS, J.

Appellant was charged in two counts, one with forging a cheek and the other with having passed the same, knowing it to have been forged. He entered a plea of guilty, and his punishment was assessed by the jury at confinement in the penitentary for a term of two years.

We gather from the record that appellant was tried at a term of court which adjourned on the ,33 st day of December, 1921. By some oversight he was not sentenced until April 13, 1922, and from this sentence he gave notice of appeal, notwithstanding his plea ■of guilty. He was given until the 27th day of May to file his statement of facts. There is nothing in the transcript to show at what time the term of court adjourned during which he was sentenced. The statement of facts was not filed within the.time granted by the court, but was filed on July 5," 1922, which was within 90 days from the date of sentence. Under these circumstances we have considered the statement'of facts. We find the evidence amply sufficient to have authorized appellant’s conviction, even in the absence of his plea of guilty.

There are no bills of exception in the record.

Ehiding nothing calling for a reversal of the judgment, the same is ordered affirmed.