Case Name: DECHERD v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1926-02-03
Citations: 283 S.W. 171
Docket Number: No. 9763
Parties: DECHERD v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 283
Pages: 171–172

Head Matter:
DECHERD v. STATE.
(No. 9763.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Feb. 3, 1926.
Rehearing Denied April 28, 1926.)
A. S. Broadfoot, Baskett & De Lee, and D. L. Whitehurst, all of Dallas, for appellant.
Shelby Cox, Cr. Dist. Atty., and R. G. Storey, Sp. Asst. Cr. Dist. Atty., both of Dallas, Sam D. Stinson, State’s Atty., of Austin, and Nat. Gentry, Jr., Asst. State’s Atty., of Tyler, for the State.

Opinion:
HAWKINS, J.
Conviction is for forgery of a vendor's lien note, with punishment fixed at six years in the penitentiary.
, The indictment alleges that, with intent to injure and defraud, appellant forged a vendor's lien note for $1,250, which purported to have been executed by Henry' Dannelly, payable to Geo. T. Vickers, in part payment for lot 6, in block No. 1, of R. B. Parks subdivision of block 1405 in the city of Dallas; it further alleges that the forged instrument related to and affected an interest in land in the state of Texas, and, if true, would have affected the title to land.
The prosecution grew out of the same transaction reflected in- cause No. 9762, against the same appellant, 283 S. W. 168, this day decided. The $1,250 note mentioned in the opinion in that case is the note here alleged to have- been forged. The indictment is attacked upon the same grounds fully set out in the opinion in the other case. Disposition is made of the complaints as announced in cause No. 9762, 283 S. W. 168.
The motion for new trial was overruled on March 23d, and 60 days allowed in which to file statement of facts and bills of exception, which time expired on May 22d. An order of extension for 20 days was granted on May 22d, which extension expired June 12th. On June 11th the court allowed 10 days' further extension of time, which expired on June 22d. The bills of exception found in the record were not filed until -July 20th, practically a month after the last extension of time had expired. Under these conditions the state's motion to strike the bills of exception from the record must be sustained.
The facts support the judgment, and, finding no error, an affirmance is ordered.