Case Name: SMITH v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1916-06-21
Citations: 187 S.W. 758
Docket Number: No. 4142
Parties: SMITH v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 187
Pages: 758–758

Head Matter:
SMITH v. STATE.
(No. 4142.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
June 21, 1916.)
1. Ceiminal Haw &wkey;>1131(4) — Appeal—Dismissal — Imprisonment.
An order overruling a motion for a new trial, stating that defendant, having failed to enter into a recognizance, was committed to jail until the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals, sufficiently evidenced that appellant was confined in jail, so that the motion to dismiss the appeal will be overruled.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2974, 2976, 2977; Dec. Dig. &wkey;1131(4)J
2. Criminal Law <&wkey;1095, 1102 — Bills op Exceptions — Striking Out.
In a misdemeanor case, where there was no order in the record authorizing the bills of exception and statement of facts after the adjournment of the court for the term, the motion to strike them from the record will be sustained.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2847; Dee. Dig. <&wkey;1095, 1102.]
3. Criminal Law <&wkey;1133 — Appeal—Rehearing.
If appellant in term time had an order entered granting him time after the adjournment of the court for the term in which to prepare and file a statement of facts and bills of exceptions, he might make such showing on rehearing, when the record would then be considered.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2984; Dec. Dig. <®=>1133.]
4. Criminal Law <&wkey;>1090(l) — Appeal—Review.
Without a statement of the evidence or any bill of exceptions, there is no question presented for review.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2807, 3204; Dec. Dig. i&wkey;> 1090(1).]
Appeal from Wichita County Court; Harvey Harris, Judge.
Dock Smith was convicted of vagrancy, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
O. C. McDonald, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
HARPER, J.
Appellant was convicted of vagrancy, and prosecutes this appeal.
The state moves to dismiss the appeal, because there is no affirmative showing made that appellant is confined in jail and no recognizance appears in the record. We think the order overruling the motion for a new trial sufficiently evidences that appellant is confined in jail, it stating that, "said defendant having failed to enter into a recognizance, he is now committed to jail until the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals can be made and received." Therefore the motion to dismiss the appeal is overruled.
This being a misdemeanor, and there being no order in the record authorizing the filing' of the bills of exception and statement of facts after the adjournment of court for the term, the state moves to strike them from the transcript. This motion, under the law, must be sustained. However, if appellant did in term time have an order entered granting him time after the adjournment of court for the term in which to prepare and file a statement of facts and bills of exceptions, such showing can be made on rehearing, and the record will be then considered.
Without a statement of the evidence, or any bill of exception, there is no question presented we can review.
The judgment is affirmed.