Case ID: tex-crim_109/html/0135-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HAWKINS, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Eugene Epple, Hayden Wilborn and William Darnaby v. The State.
    No. 11400.
    Delivered February 29, 1928.
    Possessing Equipment, Etc. — Statement of Facts — Not Signed, Nor Approved — Cannot Be Considered.
    Where a statement of facts is not signed by State’s Attorney and is not approved by the trial judge, same cannot be considered on appeal. See Art. 760, and note 24, Vernon’s C. C. P., Vol. 2.
    Appeal from the District Court of Archer County. Tried below before the Hon. E. G. Thornton, Judge.
    Appeal from a joint conviction of three appellants for possessing equipment, etc., for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor, penalty one year, assessed against each, in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the case.
    No brief filed for appellant.
    
      A. A. Dawson, State’s Attorney, for the State.
   HAWKINS, Judge.

The three parties named were jointly indicted and jointly tried for possessing equipment for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor. The punishment assessed against each of them was one year in the penitentiary.

What purports to be a statement of facts is found in the record. It is certified by the court reporter and signed by the attorney for appellant. It is not signed by the attorney representing the state, and neither does it bear the approval of the trial judge. Without authentication of the trial judge a statement of facts cannot be considered. (For collation of authorities see note 24, under Art. 760, Vernon’s C. C. P., Vol. 2.)

The two bills of exception appearing in the record seem to present no error when considered in connection with the court’s explanation.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.