Case Name: Sam Sampson v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1904-01-20
Citations: 45 Tex. Crim. 556
Docket Number: No. 2873
Parties: Sam Sampson v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 45
Pages: 556–557

Head Matter:
Sam Sampson v. The State.
No. 2873.
Decided January 20, 1904.
1. —Statement of Facts—Filing Too Late.
When the record shows that the term of the court adjourned November 28, 1903, and the statement of facts was filed December 1, 1903, and no order granting the right to file same after adjournment, the facts can not be considered in connection with the court’s refusal to grant a continuance and its charge on the law of self-defense.
2. —Same—Judge’s Docket.
It will not avail appellant in a motion for rehearing to show by the affidavit of the trial judge that the latter had granted the former's motion to file statement of facts and bills of exception within twenty days after adjournment, but that said judge had omitted to enter the order on his docket, but had started to do so and was interrupted, as counsel for appellant must see that such order is entered.
Appeal from the District Court of Jefferson. Tried below before Hon. W. H. Pope.
Appeal from a conviction of murder in the second degree; penalty, imprisonment for fifteen years in the \ enitentiary.
No-statement necessary.
Houth & Adams, for appellant.
Howard Martin, Assistant Attornej’-General, for the State.

Opinion:
BROOKS, Judge.
Appellant was convicted of murder in the second degree, and his punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for a term of fifteen years. An examination of the transcript shows that the term of the court adjourned on November 28, 1903; and the statement of facts was filed December 1, 1903. There is no order in the record granting defendant right to file statement of facts -after the adjournment of the term; consequently the facts can not be considered. In motion for new trial appellant insists that the court erred in refusing his application for continuance, and in the charge applying the law of self-defense to the facts. These matters can not be reviewed in the absence of the facts. No error appearing in the record, the judgment, is affirmed.
Ajfirmed.