Case ID: sw_296/html/0599-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BETHEA, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WEEKS v. STATE.
    (No. 10893.)
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    June 22, 1927.
    1. Criminal law f090(I) — Only question for review in criminal case, in absence of bills of exception and objections to charge, is sufficiency of evidence to support verdict.
    In absence of bills of exception and objections to the court’s charge in a criminal case, the only question for consideration of the Court of Criminal Appeals is the sufficiency of evidence to support the verdict.
    2. Criminal law 1099(1)— Statement of facts in criminal case cannot be considered, where not approved by trial judge (Bev. St. 1925, arts. 2248, 2288).
    Statement of facts in a criminal case can-, not be considered, where it is not approved by the trial judge, as required by Bev. St. 1925, art. 2248, unless trial judge dies, when, under article 2288, his successor may approve the statement.
    Commissioners’ Decision.
    Appeal from District Court, Shackelford County; W. B. Ely, Judge.
    
      Guy Weeks was convicted of burglary, and be appeals.
    Affirmed.
    W. J. Cunningham, of Abilene, for appellant.
    Sam D. Stinson, State’s Atty., and Robt. M. Lyles, Asst. State’s Atty., both of Austin, for the State.
   BETHEA, J.

The appellant was convicted for the offense of burglary, and his punishment assessed at two years in the penitentiary.

There are no bills of exception and no objections to the court’s charge. The only question for our consideration is whether or not the evidence is sufficient to support the verdict.

The case was tried at the November term. 1926, before Hon. W. R. Ely, judge of the Eorty-Second judicial district. The statement of facts was examined and approved on March 10, 1927, by Hon. Jas. P. Stinson, special judge of the Eorty-Second judicial district. There is nothing in the record showing that the statement of facts was ever presented to Judge Ely, and no reason- is shown why same was not so done. Under article 2248, Revised Civil Statutes 1925, it is necessary that the judge who tried the case should approve the statement of facts. There is but one exception to this rule, and that is where the judge who tried the case dies before the time for such approval, in which event the same may be approved by his successor, as provided by article 2288, Revised Civil Statutes, 1925.

With the record in this condition, the statement of facts cannot be considered. Richardson v. State, 71 Tex. Cr. R. 111, 158 S. W. 517; Quinney v. State, 86 Tex. Cr. R. 358, 216 S. W. 882.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM. The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court. 
      ®=»For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes