Case Name: DODDY v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1922-03-08
Citations: 240 S.W. 555
Docket Number: No. 6731
Parties: DODDY v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 240
Pages: 555–556

Head Matter:
DODDY v. STATE.
(No. 6731.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
March 8, 1922.
Appeal Reinstated May 3, 1922.)
1. Criminal law <§=>l 109(3) — Where caption does not show bills of exceptions filed in time, appeal dismissed.
Where it was impossible to ascertain from the caption to a transcript whether the bills of exceptions and statements of facts were filed within time allotted by law. a motion to dismiss an'appeal will be granted.
2. Bail <$cx>64 — Ap.peal dismissed where recognizance not in proper form.
Where the recognizance in the record on appeal is not in, accord with Vernon’s Ann. Code Or. Proc. 1916, art. 903, but appears in the form for such recognizance for appearance in the trial court, it is not a proper recognizance for appearance, and the appeal will be dismissed.
On Motion for Rehearing.
3. Criminal law <§=400'(5) — Family Bihie inadmissible to prove jjrosecutrix’s age in rape case where her parents are witnesses.
In a rape prosecution, in view of the presence and testimony of the father and mother of prosecutrix as to her age, the introduction in evidence of a family Bible showing the- age of the injured female, as there entered by her mother about the year 1908, when it appears prosecutrix was about three years old, was reversible error!
Appeal from District Court, Morris County; R. T. Wilkinson, Judge.
Harve Doddy was convicted of rape, and •he appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
Henderson & Bolin, of Daingerfield, for appellant.
R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
LATTIMORE, J.
Appellant was convicted in the district court of Morris county of the offense of rape, and his punishment fixed at five years in the penitentiary.
Our Assistant Attorney General has moved to dismiss this appeal because of the fact that the caption to the transcript is so defective in character as to make it impossible to ascertain whether the bills of exception and statement of facts were filed within the time fixed by law. The motion must be granted for this reason, and also because the recognizance is insufficient. The caption of the transcript, which appears to be an excerpt from the minutes of. the district court of Morris county, states that the trial term of the court began on the 11th of April, 1921, but nowhere states the length of time of said term, nor when same ended. The transcript appears to have been filed in the Court of Criminal Appeals on November 30, 1921, and the certificate of the clerk of the district court of Morris county is of date November 10, 1921. Appellant's bills of ex-_ ception seem to have been filed in the court" below on August 6, 1921. The statement of facts also appears to have been filed in the court below on August 6th. It being impossible of ascertainment from said caption as to whether said bills of exception and statement of facts were filed within the time 'allowed by law, because of the defective character of said caption as above mentioned, the motion 'Of the state to dismiss is granted.
The recognizance in the record is not in accord with article 903, Vernon's C. C. P., but appears to be in form for such recognizance for appearance in the trial court. This is not a proper recognizance for appeal, and for this reason, also, it is ordered that appellant's appeal be dismissed.
other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes