Case ID: sw_166/html/0503-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "DAVIDSON, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

LANDRETH v. STATE.
    (No. 3095.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    April 15, 1914.)
    1. Criminal Law (§ 915) — Appeal-Presentation Below — Objections to Information.
    An objection that the information was not filed by the clerk could not be first raised in the motion for new trial; it being necessary to raise such objection at trial.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2152-2158; Dec. Dig. § 915.]
    2. Indictment and Information (§ 42)— Time for Filing.
    While it would be too late to file the information, after announcement of ready • for trial and the parties had gone before the jury, if it had been placed with the papers prior to the calling of the case, and the court’s attention had been called thereto, it would be deemed filed as of the date on which it was placed with the clerk.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Indictment and Information, Cent. Dig. § 153; Dec. Dig. § 42.]
    Appeal from Hill County Court; J. D. Stephenson, Judge.
    Roy Landreth was convicted of carrying a pistol in violation of law, and appeals.
    Affirmed.
    C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
    
      
      For otter cases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No. Series & Rep’r Indexes
    
   DAVIDSON, J.

This conviction was for carrying a pistol in violation of the law.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. Among other things, it is urged in the motion foi new trial that the information was never filed by the clerk, and was, therefore, illegal and void and of none effect. This was not urged prior to the trial, but was raised for the first time in the motion for new trial. There is no evidence in the record in regard to the matter, and under the decisions, it would come too late after the conviction. See Branch’s Crim. Law, § 688, for collation of authorities. The evidence, if resorted to, might have shown that the information was filed at the same time and in connection with the complaint. Anyway, it is requisite to raise the question in limine, and it comes too late after conviction.

Of course, if the information was filed after announcement of ready for trial, and the parties had gone before the jury, it would be too late to file it. If it had been placed with the papers, however, prior to calling of the case, and the court’s attention called to it, it would then be filed of the same date at which it was placed with the clerk; but in the condition this record is, it is too late.

The judgment is affirmed.