Case ID: tex-crim_96/html/0372-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LATTIMORE, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

R. G. Kimbrough v. The State.
    No. 8202.
    Decided January 23, 1924.
    Manufacturing Intoxicating Liquor — Practice on Appeal.
    In the absence of a statement of facts, the indictment following the language of the statute and the charge of the court correctly presenting the law, and in the absence of a bill of exceptions to the refusal of requested charges, and the granting of a continuance and motion to quash the indictment, the judgment below must be affirmed.
    Appeal from the District Court of Limestone. Tried below before the Honorable J. R. Bell.
    Appeal from a conviction of manufacturing intoxicating liquor; penalty, one year imprisonment in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the ease.
    No brief on file for appellant.
    
      Tom Garrard and Grover C. Morris, Assistants Attorney General, for the State.
   LATTIMORE, Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the District Court of Limestone County of manufacturing intoxicating liquor, and his punishment fixed at one year in the penitentiary.

The record is before us without statement of facts. We have examined the indictment which follows the language of the statute, and the charge of the court correctly presents the law. There are a number of special charges in the record but neither by notation upon same nor by separate bill of exceptions is it made to appear that any exception was taken to their refusal. The record also reflects the fact that a continuance was asked, but apparently its refusal was acceptable to appellant for no bill of exceptions was reserved to such action. This is also true of the court’s refusal to sustain appellant’s motion to quash the indictment.

No error appearing in the record, an affirmance is ordered.

Affirmed.