Case Name: HAMPTON v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1913-12-10
Citations: 161 S.W. 966
Docket Number: 
Parties: HAMPTON v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 161
Pages: 966–966

Head Matter:
HAMPTON v. STATE.
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Dec. 10, 1913.)
1. Criminal Law (§ 1099*) — Statement op Facts — Filing—Time.
Where accused was convicted at a term of the county court which adjourned August 16th, and his statement of facts was not filed until September 15th following, it was not filed within the required 20 days after adjournment of the court and could not therefore be considered.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2866-2880; Dec. Dig. § 1099.*]
2. Criminal Law (§ 1097*) — Appeai^Statement op Facts — Necessity—Insufficiency of Evidence.
Insufficiency of evidence to support a conviction, alleged as a basis for new trial, cannot be reviewed on appeal in the absence of a statement of facts.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2862, 2864, 2926, 2934. 2938, 2939, 2941, 2942, 2947; Dec. Dig. § 1097.*]
Appeal from Ft. Bend County Court; W. I. MeFarlane, Judge.
Tom Hampton was convicted of aggravated assault on an officer, and he appeals’.
Affirmed.
C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
DAVIDSON, J.
This conviction was for aggravated assault upon an officer."
The court adjourned on the 16th day of August; the statement of facts was filed on the 15th of September. This being a ease tried in the county court, the statement of facts to be considered ought to have been filed within 20' days from the adjournment of court. As the statement of facts was filed more than 20 days after adjournment of court, it cannot be considered under the decisions.
The motion for new trial is based on the alleged insufficiency of the evidence. In the absence of the statement of facts, this ground of the motion for new trial cannot be considered.
The judgment is affirmed.