Case ID: sw_203/html/0768-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PRENDERGAST, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

KITCHENS v. STATE.
    (No. 4977.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    May 1, 1918.
    Rehearing Denied May 29, 1918.)
    1. Criminal Law <S=»1098 — Matters Reviewable — -Record .
    Statement of facts wholly in question and answer form .will be stricken on appeal.
    2. Criminal Law c§c=31097(4) — Matters Reviewable — Reoord.
    Bills to the admission of testimony cannot be considered in the absence of a statement of faTits.
    Appeal from District Court, Angelina County ; L. D. Guinn, Judge.
    Horace Kitchens was convicted of robbery, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    S. H. Townsend, of Lufkin, for appellant. E. B. Hendricks, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   PRENDERGAST, J.

Appellant was convicted of robbery and assessed the lowest punishment.

The statement of facts is wholly in question and answer form. The state has made a motion to strike it out and not consider it. Under tbe statutes and tbe many and uniform decisions of this court tbe state’s motion must be granted. A great number of cases down to the present time could be cited, but we deem it unnecessary. We here , cite some of them: Hargrave v. State, 53 Tex. Cr. R. 147, 109 S. W. 163; Essary v. State, 53 Tex. Cr. R. 596, 111 S. W. 927; Baird v. State, 51 Tex. Cr. R. 322, 101 S. W. 991; Brown v. State, 57 Tex. Cr. R. 269, 122 S. W. 543; King v. State; 57 Tex. Cr. R. 363, 123 S. W. 135; Kempner v. State, 57 Tex. Cr. R. 355, 123 S. W. 131; Felder v. State, 59 Tex. Cr. R. 144, 127 S. W. 1055; Choate v. State, 59 Tex. Cr. R. 266, 128 S. W. 524; Hart v. State, 67 Tex. Cr. R. 497, 150 S. W. 188; Criner v. State, 71 Tex. Cr. R. 369, 159 S. W. 1059; Stephens v. State, 77 Tex. Cr. R. 30, 177 S. W. 92.

Appellant made a motion for a continuance, and lie lias some very defective and incomplete bills to the admission of certain testimony. None of these masters can be considered in the absence of a statement of facts, as has all the time been held by this court in a great number of decisions.

Hence the judgment must be affirmed. 
      (@=5>For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes