Case Name: DAY v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1915-11-10
Citations: 181 S.W. 726
Docket Number: No. 3754
Parties: DAY v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 181
Pages: 726–727

Head Matter:
DAY v. STATE.
(No. 3754.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Nov. 10, 1915.
On Motion for Rehearing, Dec. 22, 1915.
Appellant’s Rehearing Denied Jan. 19, 1916.)
Ceiminal Law <&wkey;1099 — Appeai^-Record.
Where a stenographer was employed by the county at the instance of the county judge, and defendant’s affidavits showed his presentation of the statement of facts to the county judge and county attorney, with his bill of exceptions, on the last day on which it could be approved and filed, and that it was more than 20 days before defendant and the county attorney agreed as to testimony to be included in the statement of facts, and that defendant relied on the promise of the county attorney to present it to the judge, and the affidavit of the county judge showed defendant’s presentation of the statement of facts to him, defendant’s consultation with the county attorney, and that afterwards no statement of facts was ever presented to him, either by defendant or the county attorney, though he was ready and willing to have signed an agreed statement of facts, held that defendant was not deprived of a record in the cause, any negligence of the county attorney in not presenting the statement to the judge being the negligence of the defendant.
[Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2866-2880; Dec. Dig. &wkey;> 1099.]
Appeal from Collingsworth County Court; A. C. Nicholson, Judge.
Eleteher Day was convicted of using abusive, vulgar, and indecent language in a public place, in a manner calculated to disturb the inhabitants, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
R. H. Templeton, of Wellington, and Ramsey, Black & Ramsey, of Austin, for appellant. C. O. McDonald, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
HARPER, J.
Appellant was convicted of the offense of using abusive, vulgar, and indecent language in a public place, in a manner calculated to disturb the inhabitants, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $1.
The statement of facts on file bears only the signature of appellant's counsel, and, of course, cannot be considered. Affidavits have been filed pro and con as to whether or not appellant's counsel have been guilty of such negligence as to deprive him of the right to have the case reversed because appellant has been deprived of a statement of facts. It appears that this case was considered of so much importance appellant asked that a stenographer be appointed to report the testimony, and one was appointed by the court. A 20-day order was entered in which a statement of facts could be filed. .The stenographer's certificate shows that appellant requested and paid her to prepare both a record in question and answer form and narrative, and this she did within II days from the day of adjournment of court. Both these records are before us, signed alone by appellant's counsel. As hereinbefore stated, there is a conflict in the affidavits on file; but, inasmuch as it appears that appellant took the precaution of having a stenographer appointed in order to have the case before us on a correct statement of facts, and appellant paid her to make out both a narrative statement and a statement in question and answer form, so that it would be easy to agree on a correct statement of the evidence, that same was made out in ample time, and that due diligence in the case is shown to have been exercised by appellant's counsel, we are of the opinion he is entitled to have the ease reversed and remanded, because he has been deprived of a record in the cause.
The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.
<S=pJ7or other oases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes