Case Name: YOUNG v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1911-02-08
Citations: 134 S.W. 736
Docket Number: 
Parties: YOUNG v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 134
Pages: 736–736

Head Matter:
YOUNG v. STATE.
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Feb. 8, 1911.
Rehearing Denied March 1, 1911.)
1. Ceiminal Law (§ 1092*) — Appeal and Error — Statement op Facts and Bill of Exceptions — Approval and Verification.
A statement of facts and bill of exceptions, not approved and verified by the county judge who heard the cause, is invalid on appeal.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2836; Dec. Dig. § 1092.*]
2. Physicians and Surgeons (§ 6*) — Practicing Without Authority — Indictment-Sufficiency.
Under Acts 30th Leg. c. 123, § 4, and subdivision 2 of section 13, defining and regulating the practice of medicine, an indictment charging the defendant with unlawfully practicing medicine, without having properly registered his authority for so doing, and treating and offering to treat physical disease and disorder, and making a charge therefor, is sufficient.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Physicians and Surgeons, Cent. Dig. § 9; Dec. Dig. § 6.*]
3. Criminal Law (§ 1144*) — Appeal and Error — Statement of Facts — Presumptions in Absence op.
In the absence of a statement of facts, if the charge of the court is applicable to any state of facts that might be proven under the allegations, the Supreme Court will assume that the county court properly submitted the law of the case.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 3032; Dec. Dig. § 1144.*]
Appeal from Cooke County Court; C. R. Pearman, Judge.
Henry Young was indicted for unlawfully practicing medicine, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
See, also, 128 S. W. 1103.
Henry Young, pro se. C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
HARPER, J.
The appellant was indicted by the grand jury of Cooke county for unlawfully practicing medicine, without having properly registered his authority for so doing, and treating and offering to treat physical disease and disorder, and making a charge therefor. The cause was transferred to the county court, and upon a trial he was adjudged guilty, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $200 and 60 days' confinement in jail.
1. The Assistant Attorney General files a motion to strike out the statement of facts and bills of exceptions herein filed, because they, nor either of them, are not approved and verified by the county judge. To be of any validity whatever, the statement of facts and bills of exceptions must be approved and signed by the judge. Lawrence v. State, 7 Tex. App. 192; Bennett v. State, 16 Tex. App. 236; Johnson v. State, 29 Tex. 492; Moss v. State, 39 Tex. Cr. R. 3, 43 S. W. 983, 44 S. W. 832; Rushing v. State, 25 Tex. App. 607, 8 S. W. 807.
2. The indictment is valid, and charges an offense against the laws of this state, under section 4, and subdivision 2 of section 13, of chapter 123 of the Acts of the Thirtieth Legislature, an act to define and regulate the practice of medicine, and, the indictment being valid, in the absence ,of a statement of facts, if the charge of the court is applicable to any state of facts that might be proven under the allegations, this court will assume that the county court properly submitted to the jury the law of the case. Wright v. State, 37 Tex. Cr. R. 146, 38 S. W. 1004; Jones v. State, 34 Tex. Cr. R. 642, 31 S. W. 644.
The judgment is affirmed.