Case ID: tex-crim_85/html/0247-01.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

Otto Linthecum v. The State.
    No. 5372.
    Decided April 23, 1919.
    Robbery—Statement of Facts—Practice on Appeal.
    In the absence of a statement of facts, the refusal of requested charges cannot be considered on appeal.,
    Appeal from the Criminal District Court of Dalis. Tried below before the Hon. Robt. B. Seay, judge.
    Appeal from a conviction of robbery; penalty five years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the case.
    No brief on file for appellant.
    
      E. A. Berry, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
   LATTIMORE, Judge.

In this case the record is before us without any bill of exceptions or any statement of facts. We find in the record a special charge réquesting the court to peremptorily instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty. In the absence of a statement of facts we cannot tell whether the action of the court was correct or not, but our presumption necessarily is that it was!

There are various assignments in the motion for new trial but we cannot review same in the absence of such statement.

No errors being apparent the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Affirmed.