Case ID: mo_135/html/0677-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Sherwood, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The State v. Rolley, Appellant.
    
    Division Two,
    November 20, 1896.
    Appellate Practice: bill or exceptions, Requisites or. Where it does not appear from the record nor from indorsements upon it that a supposed hill of exceptions was ever filed, it will be disregarded upon appeal as not being properly authenticated.
    
      Appeal from Ozark Circuit Court. — Hon. W. N. Evans, Judge.
    Affirmed.
    
      R. F. Walker, attorney general, for the state.
    There is nothing in the entire transcript to show that the hill of exceptions was ever filed. If filed during term time, the record entry must show it; if filed at any time after the adjournment of the term, the in-dorsement must appear upon the bill of exceptions; neither appear from this record; hence this appeal must be determined from the record proper. Lafollette v. Thompson, 83 Mo. 199.
   Sherwood, J.

The defendant, indicted for and convicted of obtaining money under false pretenses, and his punishment assessed at three years in the penitentiary, appeals to this court.

The defendant is not represented in this court by counsel and so we have examined the record. The indictment is in proper form, but it does not appear from the record nor from an indorsement upon it by the clerk, that the bill of exceptions was ever filed. In such circumstances, the supposed bill must be disregarded as not being properly authenticated. Lafollette v. Thompson, 83 Mo. 199.

As there is no error in the record proper, we affirm the judgment.

All concur.