Case ID: sw_249/html/0862-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MORROW, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STAGGS v. STATE.
    (No. 7602.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    April 4, 1923.)
    Criminal law <@=>1092(7)— Bills of exceptions not tiled within prescribed time cannot be considered.
    Bills of exceptions not filed within a prescribed time, or within an extension thereof allowed, cannot, under Code Cr. Proc. 1911, art. 845, be considered on appeal.
    Appeal from Criminal Distinct Court, Tar-rant County; George E. Hosey, Judge.
    M. W. Staggs was convicted of unlawful, possession of intoxicating liquor, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Baskin, Dodge & Beene, of Port Worth, for appellant.
    R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   MORROW, P. J.

The offense is the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor. ‘

We find several bills of exceptions copied in the record, but unfortunately we have not the privilege- of considering them for the reason that they were not filed in time .to become a part of the record. The term of court continued more than 8 weeks, and the motion for new trial was overruled on the 29th of September. The court adjourned on the 30th of September. An order was made allowing appellant 60 days within which to prepare and file his bills of exceptions. According to the file mark, they were not filed until December 20th. The state, through its Assistant Attorney General, objects to their consideration. The statute makes it imperative that this objection be sustained. See Code Or. Proc. art. 845; Vernon’s Tex. Crim. Stat. vol. 2, p. 836, note 15, and cases listed; Griffin v. State, 62 Tex. Cr. R. 98, 136 S. W. 778.

A recital of the evidence is deemed unnecessary. Suffice it to say that it is sufficient to support the verdict.

The judgment is affirmed. 
      ^=>For other oases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes