Armstrong v. State
Decision Date | 15 June 1910 |
Citation | 130 S.W. 1011 |
Parties | ARMSTRONG v. STATE. |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from Criminal District Court, Dallas County; Robt. B. Seay, Judge.
Monroe Armstrong was convicted of burglary, and appeals. Affirmed.
Wasson & Capers, for appellant. John A. Mobley, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
This is an appeal from a conviction for burglary, with a penalty of two years' confinement in the penitentiary.
The state has filed a motion to strike out the bills of exception and statement of facts on the ground that they were not filed within time. The term of court at which this trial was had began on the 1st day of October, 1909, and adjourned on the 1st day of January, 1910. The trial of this case was had on the 4th day of October, 1909. Sentence was pronounced on December 19, 1909. The bills of exception were filed on February 15, 1910, and the statement of facts filed February 17, 1910. We find also in the record an order, made on February 10, 1910, by the district judge, extending the time for filing bills of exception and statement of facts. Chapter 39, p. 374, Acts of the 31st Legislature, provides for the appointment and qualification of stenographers, and also prescribes the time and method of making up statement of facts. Section 7 of said act provides that when an appeal is taken the parties to the suit shall be entitled to 30 days after the adjournment of the court in which to file bills of exception and statement of facts. It is provided, further, in said section that a judge may have power in term time or in vacation, upon the application of either party, to extend the time for filing such bills of exception and statement of facts, but that this time shall not be so extended as to delay the filing of the transcript in the appellate court within the time prescribed by law. It is further provided in said section: "If the term of said court may by law continue more than eight weeks, said statement of facts and bills of exception shall be filed within thirty days after final judgment shall be rendered unless the court shall by order entered of record in said cause extend the time for filing such statement and bills of exception." The term of the court at Dallas lasted from the 1st day of October until the 1st day of January— three months. The bill of exceptions and statement of facts were filed nearly two months after the sentence was pronounced.
The order made by the judge...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Nothaf v. State
...the state. Roberts v. State, 62 Tex. Cr. R. 7, 136 S. W. 483; Griffin v. State, 59 Tex. Cr. R. 424, 128 S. W. 1134; Armstrong v. State, 60 Tex. Cr. R. 59, 130 S. W. 1011; Hart v. State, 86 Tex. Cr. R. 655, 218 S. W. A new trial was applied for because of newly discovered evidence. This is a......
-
Harr v. State
...extension. Griffin v. State, 59 Tex. Cr. R. 424, 128 S. W. 1134; Sanders v. State, 60 Tex. Cr. R. 34, 129 S. W. 605; Armstrong v. State, 60 Tex. Cr. R. 59, 130 S. W. 1011; Presley v. State, 60 Tex. Cr. R. 102, 131 S. W. 332; Roberts v. State, 70 Tex. Cr. R. 588, 157 S. W. 1193; Glasper v. S......
-
Leago v. State
...by statute, or within the time fixed by prior court order. Sanders v. State, 60 Tex. Cr. R. 34, 129 S. W. 605; Armstrong v. State, 60 Tex. Cr. R. 59, 130 S. W. 1011; Samples v. State, 80 Tex. Cr. R. 418, 190 S. W. 486; Parker v. State, 83 Tex. Cr. R. 81, 200 S. W. 1083; Hart v. State, 86 Te......
-
Hart v. State
...sufficient. Roberts v. State, 62 Tex. Cr. R. 7, 136 S. W. 483; Griffin v. State, 59 Tex. Cr. R. 424, 128 S. W. 1134; Armstrong v. State, 60 Tex. Cr. R. 59, 130 S. W. 1011; Pecos & N. T. Ry. Co. v. Cox, 104 Tex. 556, 140 S. W. 1078; Glasper v. State, 76 Tex. Cr. R. 310, 174 S. W. 585. It wil......