Case Name: MEYER v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1913-11-19
Citations: 160 S.W. 1190
Docket Number: 
Parties: MEYER v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 160
Pages: 1190–1190

Head Matter:
MEYER v. STATE.
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Nov. 19, 1913.)
Criminal Law (§ 1106 ) — Appeal—Record-Time for Perfection.
Where sentence was pronounced upon accused on the 25th day of January, the records in his appeal should be filed with the Court of Criminal Appeals not later than April 25th.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal íío'e *]* Dig. §§ 2890-2892; Dec. Dig. §
Appeal from Criminal District Court, Dallas County; Barry Miller, Judge.
Jim Meyer was convicted of theft, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
For other cases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No. Series & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
HARPER, J.
Appellant was prosecuted and convicted of theft, and his punishment assessed at three years' confinement in the penitentiary.
As no statement of facts, nor bills of exceptions accompany this record, no question is presented in the motion for a new trial we can review.
This appellant was tried and sentence pronounced on him on the 25th day of last January; and, if the appeal was not going to be perfected, it is a hardship on him to be compelled to lie in jail from then until now, about 10 months, before beginning his sentence, and an expense to the county in feeding and caring for him during that time that it should not have been compelled to pay. If records were promptly sent to this court, as required by the law, this would not occur. In this case the law required this record to have been filed in this court not later than April 25th, but it was not done until some five months later than that time. Such neglect is inexcusable, and works a hardship both on the prisoner and the county. We keep calling attention to these matters in the hope that we may get the officers to comply with their plain duty under our Code of Criminal Procedure.
Affirmed.