Case Name: GARRETT v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1929-03-27
Citations: 20 S.W.2d 206
Docket Number: No. 11882
Parties: GARRETT v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 20
Pages: 206–207

Head Matter:
GARRETT v. STATE.
(No. 11882.)
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
March 27, 1929.
Rehearing Denied Oct. 9, 1929.
A. P. C. Petsch, of Fredericksburg, and A. G. Mueller and Lawrence L. Bruhl, both of Llano, for appellant.
A. A. Dawson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

Opinion:
MARTIN, J.
Appellant was convicted of fraudulently receiving and concealing stolen property under the fourth count of an indictment charging him with such offense. His penalty was assessed at two years' confinement in the penitentiary.
The transcript shows that court adjourned on January 28, 19-28, and none of appellant's bills of exception were filed until April 25; 1928. No order of extension appears in the record. Under the terms of article 760, Code Or. Proc. 1925, appellant's bills were filed too late for consideration.
It is claimed that there exists no such offense as the one of which appellant was convicted. The verdict, judgment, and sentence follow the fourth count of the indictment, which correctly charges that appellant fraudulently received and concealed stolen property. A rather exhaustive discussion of this question will be found in the recent case of Ed Smith and Jim Wright v. State (Tex. Cr. App. No. 11520) 18 S.W.(2d) 1070, opinion handed down on February 6, 1929. Under this authority, appellant's contention is without merit.
We have carefully examined the evidence, and, believing the same sufficient, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
PER CURIAM. The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.