Case Name: Henry Monckton v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1922-04-26
Citations: 92 Tex. Crim. 235
Docket Number: No. 6906
Parties: Henry Monckton v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 92
Pages: 235–236

Head Matter:
Henry Monckton v. The State.
No. 6906.
Decided April 26, 1922.
Rehearing Denied June 14, 1922.
1, —Forgery—Practice on Appeal.
In the absence of a statement of facts or bills of exception, the indictment and charge of the court appearing to be in due form, the judgment below must be affirmed.
2. —Same—Pauper’s Affidavit — Inability to Pay Cost — Certiorari.
Where appellant asked that a writ of certiorari be granted to perfect the record and to compel the court stenographer of the trial court to prepare and send up for our inspection a statement of the facts herein, but the so-called affidavit was not in form and it was not sworn to, that defendant is not able to pay the costs, nor that he is unable to secure the payment of said costs, the certiorari cannot be granted and the motion must be overruled.
Appeal from the Criminal District Court of Dallas. ° Tried below before the Honorable R B. Seay.
' Appeal from a conviction of forgery; penalty, five years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
The opinion states the case.
No brief on file for appellant.
R. G. Storey, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Opinion:
LATTIMORE, Judge.
— Appellant was convicted in the Criminal District Court of Dallas County of the offense of forgery, and his punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of five years.
The record is before us without any statement of facts or bills of exception. We have examined the indictment and the charge of the court and each appears to be in due and regular form. No error appearing in this case, the judgment of the trial court will be affirmed.
Affirmed.