Case Name: HOUSETON v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1923-06-13
Citations: 255 S.W. 188
Docket Number: No. 7802
Parties: HOUSETON v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 255
Pages: 188–189

Head Matter:
HOUSETON v. STATE.
(No. 7802.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
June 13, 1923.
Rehearing Denied Nov. 7, 1923.)
1. Criminal law <&wkey;1097(5) — Exceptions to charges as on weight of and unauthorized by evidence, and misleading, not considered in absence of statement of facts.
Exceptions to charges as on the weight of evidence, and unauthorized by the evidence, and misleading the jury as to the effect thereof, cannot be considered in the absence of a statement of facts.
2. Criminal law <&wkey; 1059(2) — Defendant presenting no specific exceptions to, or request for amplification of, charge complained of, cannot complain on appeal.
Defendant, presenting no exceptions sufficiently specific to call the trial court’s attention to his objection to a charge presenting the converse of a charge on provoking the difficulty, nor requesting a special charge amplifying it, cannot complain on appeal, in view of Vernon’s Ann. Code Or. Proc. 1916, art. 737a, 743.
On Motion for Rehearing.
3. Criminal law &wkey;>l099(7) — Showing held insufficient to show freedom from negligence in not filing statement of facts.
Appellant’s showing that, no steps having been taken to perfect his appeal until about two weeks before expiration of the time for filing a statement of facts, he employed other attorneys, who were unable to find the court reporter and applied for an extension of time, which was denied, 'held insufficient to show him free from negligence, in the absence of any showin'g as to any effort 'by him or his attorneys to prepare and file such a statement.
other cases see same topic and IvEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
Appeal from District Court, San Saba County; J. H. McLean, Judge.
A. G. Houseton was convicted of manslaughter, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Harris Bell, of Austin, for appellant.
R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
HAWKINS, J.
Conviction is for manslaughter with an assessed punishment of four years in the penitentiary.
No statement of facts appears in the record, and the only exceptions are to certain paragraphs of the charge. In many instances the exceptions are qualified by a statement from the learned trial judge that he altered his charge to conform to the suggestions of counsel for appellant.
We find an exception to subdivisions 5 and 6 of the eighth paragraph of the 'charge on the ground (a) that they are upon the weight of the evidence; (b) that the facts form no* basis authorizing the court to submit them; and (c) that they are misleading, for that the jury might conclude therefrom that in the opinion of the court the defendant by his own wrongful act produced a condition wherein it became necessary for his safety that he take the life of deceased. It needs only to set out the objections to make it apparent that this court cannot appraise such exceptions in the absence of knowledge of what facts were in evidence.
It is argued both orally and by brief filed that the court having charged on provoking the difficulty should also have charged the converse. Subdivision 6 of paragraph 8 does present the converse. No exception was taken to it further than as iádicatéd above. If appellant was dissatisfied with the language of it, he should have presented exceptions sufficiently specific to call the trial court's attention to his complaint, or have requested a special charge amplifying it, if he thought it necessary to do so. He did neither, and cannot be heard to complain at this late hour. Articles 787a, 743, Vernon's C. C. P. 1916; Rodgers v. State, 93 Tex. Cr. R. 1, 245 S. W. 697; Richardson v. State, 91 Tex. Cr. R. 318, 239 S. W. 218, 20 A. L. R. 1249; Littleton v. State, 91 Tex. Cr. R. 205, 239 S. W. 202; Jordan v. State, 91 Tex. Cr. R. 371, 238 S. W. 1113.
The judgment is affirmed.