Case ID: sw_151/html/0811-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HARPER, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STONE v. STATE.
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Dec. 4, 1912.)
    Oriminal Law (§ 1090*) — Appeal—Review-Record.
    Grounds of a motion for new trial relating to the admission and exclusion of evidence cannot be reviewed, in the absence of bills of exception.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2653, 2789, 2803-2822, 2825-2827, 2928, 2948, 3204; Dec. Dig. § 1090.*]
    Appeal from District Court, Collin County; J. M. Pearson, Judge.
    Pearl Stone was convicted of, pursuing the occupation of selling intoxicating liquors in prohibition territory, and she appeals.
    Affirmed.
    C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   HARPER, J.

Appellant was indicted, prosecuted, and convicted of unlawfully pursuing the occupation of selling intoxicating liquors in prohibition territory, and her punishment assessed at two years’ confinement in the penitentiary.

The two grounds in the motion, complaining that the court erred in admitting testimony, and in excluding testimony, cannot be considered by us, as there are no bills of exception in the record.

There was no error in the court refusing the special charges requested. There was no evidence calling for the first special charge; the record not even suggesting that she, in making the sales and pursuing the occupation, was acting under the direction of her husband.

The statutes provide that the purchaser of intoxicating liquor in prohibition territory is not an accomplice; consequently the court did not err in refusing the instruction presenting this issue.

The only ground in the motion complaining of the charge of the court is too general to be considered.

The judgment is affirmed.