Case ID: sw_245/html/0926-03.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

LANCASTER v. STATE.
    (No. 7415.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Dec. 20, 1922.)
    Criminal law <&wkey;!038(l), 1056(1) — Error in charge not excepted to at trial not considered on appeal.
    Error in court’s charge, where bills of exception shows no objection'or exception At the time of trial, cannot be considered on appeal, under Code Or. Proc. 1911, arts. 735-743; Vernon’s Ann. Code Cr. Proc. 1916, art. 743, §§ 62-64.
    Appeal from District Court, Wichita County; P. A. Martin, Judge.
    Anderson Lancaster was convicted of the theft of two bales, of cotton, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   HAWKINS, J.

Appellant was convicted for the theft of two bales of cotton, his punishment being assessed at two years’ confinement in the penitentiary.

D. N. Cox was public weigher and had the cotton in his control, care, and management. The indictment properly alleged ownership in him.

There appears in the record five bills of exception, all of which complain at some alleged omission from the court’s charge, or at something embraced therein. Court adjourned on April 1, 1922. These' bills were not filed until April 28th. Nothing appears in the bills themselves, or elsewhere in the record, showing any objection or exception to the charge at the time of trial. If there was any merit in them, they could not be considered. See articles 735-743, O. C. P., and authorities collated under sections 62, 63 and 64, art. 743, Vernon’s O. O. P.

The evidence leaves no doubt as to .appellant’s guilt, and we fail to discover any error in the record. The charge of the court correctly presents the law. The judgment is affirmed.