Case ID: sw_150/html/0431-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      DAVIDSON, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

RAWLS v. STATE.
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    June 26, 1912.
    On Motion for Rehearing, Oct. 16, 1912.)
    1. Criminal Law (§ 1099*) — Record—Statement of Pacts — Approval by Trial Judge.
    A statement of facts signed by the attorneys, but not approved by the judge, cannot be considered on appeal.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2866-2880; Dec. Dig. § 1099.*]
    2. Criminal Law (§ 1097*) — Record—Absence of Statement of Facts — Questions Reviewable.
    In the absence of a statement of facts, the court on appeal cannot review questions involving the sufficiency of the evidence and alleged errors in the instructions.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2862, 2864, 2926, 2934, 2938, 2939, 2941, 2942, 2947; Dec. Dig. § 1097.*]
    On Motion for Rehearing.
    3. Criminal Law (§, 1101*) — Statement of Facts — Diligence of Accused — Effect.
    Where accused is deprived of a statement of facts without neglect on his part and he has used due diligence to procure it, he is entitled to a reversal to enable him to have his case fairly tried on the facts adduced against him.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 3204; Dec. Dig. § 1101.*]
    4. Criminal Law (§ 1109*) — Statement of Facts — Diligence of Accused —Effect.
    Where a statement of facts was signed and approved by the attorneys on both sides, and the trial judge certified that he read and approved the facts, but neglected to sign it, but-filed it with the proper officer, accused was entitled to a reversal to enable him to have a properly certified statement of facts before the court on appeal.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2897, 2898, 2900, 2902-3204; Dec. Dig. •§ 1109.*]
    Appeal from Jasper County Court; W. R. Blackshear, Judge.
    Frone Rawls was convicted of crime, and he appeals.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Garland Smith, of Jasper, for appellant. C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   DAVIDSON, P. J.

Appellant was convicted under an information charging her with enticing and decoying a minor from the custody of I. N. Graham, the legally appointed guardian of the minor, whose name was Silas Castle.

What purports to be a statement of facts in the record is signed by the attorneys but was not approved by the judge. It therefore cannot be considered.

In the absence of a statement of facts we are unable to revise the questions presented, to wit, the want of sufficient evidence and errors of omission and commission in connection with the charge of the court.

With the record in this condition the judgment must be affirmed, and it is, accordingly, so ordered.

On Motion for Rehearing.

This case was affirmed without reference to the statement of facts, the evidence being in such condition it could not be considered by this court, not having been approved by the trial judge. Motion for rehearing has been filed, alleging that the failure of the trial judge to approve the statement of facts arose from no want of diligence on the part of the defendant, and the reason for failing to obtain the signature and approval of the judge not only arose from no fault of defendant but from the fault of the trial judge. Among other things, in this connection the statement of the judge certified under the seal of the court shows as follows: “I, W. R. Blackshear, county judge of Jasper county, Texas, do hereby certify that I was county judge of Jasper county during the January term, A. D. 1912, of the county court of said county, and have held said position continuously since said time, and that I presided over the trial of the case of State of Texas v. Prone Rawls, No. 209; that there was presented to me an agreed statement of facts in said ease signed by County Attorney C. C. Ingram and Garland Smith, attorney for defendant Prone Rawls, which statement of facts was carefully read over by me and approved at the time; that I intended to have placed my signature on said agreed statement of facts, evidencing such approval, but it has been brought to my attention that I failed to do so; that my failure to sign said statement of facts was due to no neglect on the part of defendant therein; that said statement of facts was filed in the county court of Jasper county, Texas, on the 8th day of March, 1912. Witness my hand and seal of office officially, this the ninth day of July, A. D. nineteen hundred and twelve. [Signed] W. R. Black-shear, County Judge of Jasper County, Texas.”

Where a defendant is deprived of a statement of facts without fault or neglect on his part, and he has used due diligence to procure it, he is entitled to a reversal of the judgment in order that he may have his case fairly tried upon the facts adduced against him on his trial. It is shown here he did what he could. The statement of facts is signed and approved by the attorneys upon both sides, and the judge certifies he read and approved the facts but neglected to sign it, but filed it with the proper officer. Under this showing appellant is entitled to a reversal. of the judgment in order that we may have a properly certified statement of facts before us in passing on the questions presented. Sara v. State, 22 Tex. App. 639, 3 S. W. 339; Shaffer v. State, 58 Tex. Cr. R. 646, 127 S. W. 207; Shaffer v. State, 58 Tex. Cr. R. 648, 127 S. W. 206; Sargent v. State, 61 Tex. Cr. R. 34, 133 S. W. 885. There are numerous other cases to the same effect laying down the same doctrine.

For the reasons stated the rehearing is granted, the affirmance is set aside, and the judgment is now reversed and the cause is remanded.