Case ID: sw2d_31/html/1072-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HAWKINS, J. LATTIMORE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

TAYLOR v. STATE.
    No. 13728.
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Oct. 15, 1930.
    Rehearing Denied Nov. 5, 1930.
    W. A. Cook, of Groveton, for appellant.
    ■ Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.
   HAWKINS, J.

Conviction is for theft of hogs, punishment being two years in the penitentiary.

No statement of facts accompanies the record. The showing attempted to be made here that appellant has been deprived of a statement of facts without fault or attributable to him or his attorney is entirely insufficient.

We find a bill of exception complaining that the trial court declined to hear evidence on the motion for new trial touching appellant’s sanity. No issue of sanity was submitted- in the charge to the jury; no exception was reserved to its omission; no special charge submitting the issue was requested ; no affidavit to the effect that appellant had become insane since the trial is found in the record; no claim of newly discovered evidence on the question of sanity is set up in the motion for new trial. These things being true, we are at a loss to discover why the court should have heard any evidence on the issue suggested. The bill is further defective in not apprising us of what the proposed evidence consisted.

No error appearing in the record, the judgment is affirmed.

.On Motion for Rehearing.

LATTIMORE, J.

Appellant’s motion for rehearing constitutes a ■ rather serious indictment against attorneys who fail to properly prepare and have filed within time statements of fact in their clients cases. This court is in no wise responsible for the law, as it is made by the Legislature, and we have no way of punishing lawyers who do not properly take care of the interests of their clients, and who may fail to present proper bills of exception or to have statements of fact filed in time.

Finding no complaint in the motion of any matter upon which we might grant same, the motion will be overruled.

HAWKINS, J., absent.