Case Name: WELLS v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1911-02-15
Citations: 134 S.W. 702
Docket Number: 
Parties: WELLS v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 134
Pages: 702–702

Head Matter:
WELLS v. STATE.
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Feb. 15, 1911.)
1. Criminal Law (§ 1097*) — Appeal—Statement of Facts — Necessity.
Unless instructions are so fundamentally erroneous that they would be inapplicable to any evidence admissible under the indictment, they cannot be reviewed, in absence of a statement of facts.
[Ed. Note. — For other eases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2862; Dec. Dig. § 1097.*]
2. Criminal Law (§ 1090*) — Appeau—Statement of Facts.
In absence of a bill of exceptions and statement of facts in the record on a criminal appeal, a ruling denying a continuance cannot be reviewed.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2812; Dec. Dig. § 1090.*]
3. Ceiminal Law (§ 1094*) — Appeai>-Dis-POSITION — AFFIRMANCE — INSUFFICIENT Presentation on Appeal.
A judgment of conviction will be affirmed, where, because of the absence of a statement of facts and bills of exceptions, the alleged errors cannot be reviewed.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2S07, 3204; Dec. Dig. § 1094.*]
Appeal from Criminal District Court, Dallas County; Robt. B. Seay, Judge.
Jim Wells was convicted of first degree murder, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
DAVIDSON, P. J.
Appellant was convicted of murder in the first degree; his punishment being assessed at life imprisonment.
The record contains neither a statement of the facts nor bills of exceptions. The matters set forth in the motion for new trial, in this condition of the. record, are not so presented that they can be intelligently revised.
The charge contained in the record is applicable to a state of facts which could have been shown before the jury. In order to intelligently review a criticism of the charge, the statement of facts must be before the court, unless the charge is so fundamentally erroneous that it would not be applicable to any state of case that would be authorized by the indictment.
The ruling of the court in refusing the continuance, in the absence of the facts and bills of exceptions, cannot be revised.
As the matter is presented by this record, we cannot review them, and the judgment is therefore affirmed.