Case ID: tex-crim_108/html/0463-01.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

Paul Artho v. The State.
    No. 11319.
    Delivered January 4, 1928.
    Possessing Intoxicating Liquor — Statement of Facts — Time for Filing.
    Our statutes allow ninety days for the filing of statement of facts, after the overruling of a motion for a new trial. In this case the statement of facts was filed two days after the expiration of the time allowed and cannot be considered.
    Appeal from the District Court of Smith County. Tried below before the Hon. Reese Tatum, Judge.
    Appeal from a conviction for possessing intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale, penalty one year in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the case.
    
      W. H. Russell of Hereford, for appellant.
    
      A. A. Dawson, State’s Attorney, for the State.
   LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for possessing intoxicating liquor for purpose of sale, punishment one year in the penitentiary. Appellant’s motion for new trial was overruled on May 17, 1927. The statement of facts shows to have been filed on August 17, 1927. The statute allows ninety days for the filing of statement of facts, after the overruling of the motion for new trial. The statement of facts was filed two days too late. Same cannot be considered.

There are three bills of exception. Each has been carefully considered. We find nothing in any calling for discussion here. None present error.

The judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.