Case Name: KITCHENS v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1918-05-01
Citations: 203 S.W. 768
Docket Number: No. 4977
Parties: KITCHENS v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 203
Pages: 768–769

Head Matter:
KITCHENS v. STATE.
(No. 4977.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
May 1, 1918.
Rehearing Denied May 29, 1918.)
1. Criminal Law <S=»1098 — Matters Reviewable — -Record .
Statement of facts wholly in question and answer form .will be stricken on appeal.
2. Criminal Law c§c=31097(4) — Matters Reviewable — Reoord.
Bills to the admission of testimony cannot be considered in the absence of a statement of faTits.
Appeal from District Court, Angelina County ; L. D. Guinn, Judge.
Horace Kitchens was convicted of robbery, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
S. H. Townsend, of Lufkin, for appellant. E. B. Hendricks, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
PRENDERGAST, J.
Appellant was convicted of robbery and assessed the lowest punishment.
The statement of facts is wholly in question and answer form. The state has made a motion to strike it out and not consider it. Under tbe statutes and tbe many and uniform decisions of this court tbe state's motion must be granted. A great number of cases down to the present time could be cited, but we deem it unnecessary. We here , cite some of them: Hargrave v. State, 53 Tex. Cr. R. 147, 109 S. W. 163; Essary v. State, 53 Tex. Cr. R. 596, 111 S. W. 927; Baird v. State, 51 Tex. Cr. R. 322, 101 S. W. 991; Brown v. State, 57 Tex. Cr. R. 269, 122 S. W. 543; King v. State; 57 Tex. Cr. R. 363, 123 S. W. 135; Kempner v. State, 57 Tex. Cr. R. 355, 123 S. W. 131; Felder v. State, 59 Tex. Cr. R. 144, 127 S. W. 1055; Choate v. State, 59 Tex. Cr. R. 266, 128 S. W. 524; Hart v. State, 67 Tex. Cr. R. 497, 150 S. W. 188; Criner v. State, 71 Tex. Cr. R. 369, 159 S. W. 1059; Stephens v. State, 77 Tex. Cr. R. 30, 177 S. W. 92.
Appellant made a motion for a continuance, and lie lias some very defective and incomplete bills to the admission of certain testimony. None of these masters can be considered in the absence of a statement of facts, as has all the time been held by this court in a great number of decisions.
Hence the judgment must be affirmed.
(@=5>For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes