Case Name: SIMMONS v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1924-04-30
Citations: 261 S.W. 1032
Docket Number: No. 8309
Parties: SIMMONS v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 261
Pages: 1032–1033

Head Matter:
SIMMONS v. STATE.
(No. 8309.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
April 30, 1924.
Rehearing Denied May 28, 1924.)
1. Criminal law &wkey;>1098 — Statement of facts in question and answer form held insufficient.
Statement of facts consisting of questions and answers, and objection of counsel to questions, and colloquies between counsel and court relative to objections and rulings is insufficient and subject to motion to strike.
2. Criminal law &wkey;»l 097(1)— Bills of exception not considered in absence of statement of facts.
Matters in bills of exception cannot be appraised in absence of statement of facts.
Appeal from District Court, Jefferson County ; Geo. C. O’Brien, Judge.
Rad Simmons was convicted of manufacturing intoxicating liquor, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Blain & Jones, of Beaumont, for appellant.
Tom Garrard, State’s Atty., and Grover O. Morris, Asst. State’s Atty., both of Austin, for the State.

Opinion:
HAWKINS, J.
Conviction is for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor, with punishment of two years in the penitentiary.
The state's attorney has filed a motion to strike out the statement of facts for the reason that it consists largely of questions and answers, and objections of counsel to questions, and of colloquies between counsel and the court relative to such objections and the rulings of the court thereon. An inspection of the statement of facts sustains the grounds of the state's motion. We regret the condition of the record, but we must insist that the law be complied with in preparing it in order that the already heavy burden on this court be not added to. All that has been said in Fenton v. State, 93 Tex. Cr. R. 366, 248 S. W. 363, Jenkins v. State, 93 Tex. Cr. R. 375, 247 S. W. 861, and James v. State (No. 7639, not yet [officially] reported) 262 S. W. 500, is equally ap- plieable to the statement of facts in the present case, and the state's motion must be sustained.
The only bills of exception relate to criticism of the charge given and the failure to give one requested charge. These matters cannot be appraised in the absence of the statement of facts.
An affirmance of the judgment is directed.