Case Name: F. K. Barfield v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1932-05-11
Citations: 121 Tex. Crim. 99
Docket Number: No. 15203
Parties: F. K. Barfield v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 121
Pages: 99–100

Head Matter:
F. K. Barfield v. The State.
No. 15203.
Delivered May 11, 1932.
Rehearing Denied June 15, 1932.
Reported in 50 S. W. (2d) 826.
The opinion states the case.
Pat L. Pittman, of Fort Worth, for- appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Attorney, of Austin, for the State.

Opinion:
HAWKINS, Judge.
Conviction' is for passing a forged instrument, punishment being two years in the penitentiary.
The motion for new trial was overruled and notice of appeal given on October 31, 1931. Sixty days were granted in which to file statement of facts and bills of exception. No further extension order appears in the record. If any had been made the time could not have been carried beyond ninety days from the date notice of appeal was given. Article 760, C. C. P. The statement of facts and bills of exception were filed in the trial court on January 30, 1932, which was ninety-one days after notice of appeal. Under the statute -neither the statement of facts nor bills of exception may be considered. Many cases will be found collated in note 36, under article 760, Vernon's Ann. Tex. C. C. P. Some of the later cases are McKneely v. State, 110 Texas Crim. Rep., 634, 10 S. W. (2d) 544; Owens v. State, 117 Texas Crim. Rep., 263, 35 S. W. (2d) 726; Moore v. State (Texas Crim. App.), 37 S. W. (2d) 746; Loyd v. State, 118 Texas Crim. Rep., 297, 38 S. W. (2d) 1102.
The judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.