Case Name: Ex Parte George Malone
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1895-06-26
Citations: 35 Tex. Crim. 297
Docket Number: No. 760
Parties: Ex Parte George Malone.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 35
Pages: 297–302

Head Matter:
Ex Parte George Malone.
No. 760.
Decided June 26th, 1895.
Motion for Rehearing Decided December 18th, 1895.
1. Habeas Corpus—Statement of Facts.
Where the record on appeal in a habeas corpus proceeding contains what purports to be a statement of facts, but which said statement is neither signed as an agreed statement by the attorneys nor approved by the judge, the same will not be considered.
ON EEHEABING.
2. Habeas Corpus Heard in Vacation—Practice as to Authenticating Statement of Facts.
Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 201 [181], provides, that where a habeas corpus is heard before a court in session, “all the proceedings shall be entered of record by the clerk thereof, as would be done in any other case,” etc. Article 202 [183], provides, that if the proceeding be had before a judge of a court in vacation, “he shall cause all the proceedings to be written; shall certify to the same, and cause them to be filed with the clerk of the court,” etc. Held: That where the trial was before the judge in vacation, the evidence received upon the trial, constitutes no part of the “proceedings” mentioned in Article 202 [182], and though such proceedings, properly certified to by the judge, may contain all the evidence adduced at the hearing, yet such evidence cannot be considered on appeal as a statement of facts, but such statement of facts, to be sufficient, must be prepared and authenticated as in other cases, independently of the judge’s certificate to the proceedings. HENDERSON, Judge, dissents and holds: That if the proceedings, which contain the evidence as certified by the judge, had been filed with the clerk, and that officer had made out and certified the transcript for appeal, the evidence contained in the proceedings would, in that event, have been a sufficient statement of facts for consideration of the court on appeal.
Appeal from Collin County. Tried below before Hon. M. G. Abebxatiiy, County Judge.
Appellant was arrested on the 8th day of May, 1895, by the sheriff of Collin County, under an information which charged him with the violation of the local option law in said connty; and failing to give bond after his arrest, was placed in jail by the sheriff. He sued out a writ of habeas corpus before the County Judge, for his release from custody, upon the ground that the local option law, under which he was being prosecuted, was absolutely null and void, because the pretended election, adopting the same, was not held in accordance with law; and assigned twenty-six grounds as reasons why the election was null and void. At the hearing upon habeas corpus, the County Judge refused to discharge applicant, and remanded him to custody of the sheriff, from which order and judgment this appeal is taken. In view of the disposition made of the appeal, it is unnecessary to make a further statement.
M. H. Garnett, Smith & Evans and J. M. Pearson, for relator.
Mann Trice, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

Opinion:
HENDERSON, Judge.
This is a proceeding on habeas corpus. The relator applied to the County Judge of Collin County for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that he was illegally restrained of his liberty by virtue of a charge preferred against him for violation of a local option law in a precinct in Collin County, claiming that the local option election in said subdivision was not in accordance with the local option law, and so is null and void. We find in the record what purports to be a statement of facts, but same is neither signed by the attorneys as an agreed statement of the facts, nor is there any certificate of approval by the judge, and same cannot be considered. See Hess v. State, 30 Tex. Crim. App., 478; Wilson v. State (decided at present term). No questions are raised in the record outside the statement of facts, or which can be considered by us without reference to a statement of facts; and, there appearing no errors in the record requiring a reversal of the case, the. judgment of the lower court is accordingly affirmed.
Affirmed*