Bettis v. State
| Decision Date | 18 October 1899 |
| Parties | BETTIS v. STATE. |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Appeal from circuit court, Jefferson county; W. R. Hicks, Judge.
Clyde Bettis was convicted of murder, and appeals. Affirmed.
J. J Coile and Park & Park, for appellant.
G. W Pickle, Atty. Gen., for the State.
Clyde Bettis was indicted and tried in the circuit court of Jefferson county for the murder of Leander Cox. He was convicted of murder in the second degree, and sentenced to the penitentiary for 10 years. Motion for new trial having been made and overruled, he appealed in error to this court and here insists that the trial judge committed error in certain rulings upon the admissibility of evidence and in his charge to the jury, and that the verdict was not warranted by the evidence introduced. The state contends that none of the objections urged can be considered by this court, for the want of a bill of exceptions, and that what purports to be a bill of exceptions cannot be so regarded, because not filed within the time required by law. The term of the court at which the trial and conviction were had closed on the 26th day of August, 1899, and the alleged bill of exceptions was filed September 8, 1899. It has long been settled that a bill of exceptions filed after the close of the term at which the case was tried, as in this instance, comes too late, and therefore cannot be considered a part of the record. Clark v. Lary, 3 Sneed, 77; McGavock v. Puryear, 6 Cold. 34; Jones v. Burch, 3 Lea, 747; Sims v. State, 4 Lea, 359; Patterson v. Patterson, 89 Tenn. 151, 14 S.W. 485; Ballard v. Railroad Co., 94 Tenn. 205, 28 S.W. 1088. But it is said in behalf of Bettis that this rule was changed by chapter 275 of the Acts of 1899, and that the present bill of exceptions was made out and filed under and in accordance with that change. The language of the statute is as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Crowe v. Corp. of Charlestown
... ... within the 30 days. In disposing of this question, it may be ... well to review the decisions and statutes of this state and ... Virginia, and of some of the other states ... The ... practice under our statute, prior to the passage of the acts ... adjournment, otherwise they will be treated as a nullity, and ... not considered a part of the record. Bettis v ... State, 103 Tenn. 339, 52 S.W. 1071; Tucker v ... Moore, 61 S.W. 81, 106 Tenn. 188; Muse v ... State, 61 S.W. 80, 106 Tenn. 181. "In ... ...
-
Nashville Ry. & Light Co. v. Trawick
... ... 719, 63 S.W. 1120; Hinton v ... Insurance Co., 110 Tenn. 118, 72 S.W. 118; Jones v ... Moore, 106 Tenn. 188, 61 S.W. 81; Muse v ... State, 106 Tenn. 181, 61 S.W. 80; Bettis v ... State, 103 Tenn. 339, 52 S.W. 1071 ... [99 S.W. 696] ... A ... question is made, ... ...
-
Dunn v. State
... ... subject (Hinton v. Insurance Co., 110 Tenn. 113, 72 ... S.W. 118; Patterson v. Patterson, 89 Tenn. 151, 154, ... 14 S.W. 485), or within such time after the adjournment of ... the term, not exceeding 30 days, as the judge may grant under ... authority of the statute on that subject (Bettis v ... State, 103 Tenn. 339, 52 S.W. 1071; Rhinehart v ... State, 122 Tenn. 698, 127 S.W. 445). Likewise the judge, ... by adjourning from day to day as usual, or to a day certain ... before final adjournment, may extend the term, when a case is ... on trial and uncompleted when the regular ... ...
-
Scopes v. State
... ... term, by order on the minutes, time be granted, not exceeding ... thirty days from the date of adjournment, for the making and ... filing of a bill of exceptions." Dunn v. State, ... 127 Tenn. 267, 154 S.W. 969; Rhinehart v. State, 122 ... Tenn. 698, 127 S.W. 445; Bettis v. State, 103 Tenn ... 339, 52 S.W. 1071 ... After ... these cases came chapter 49 of the Public Acts of 1917, but ... that act only provided that the trial judge might "in ... his discretion allow the parties time in which to prepare and ... file the bill of exceptions ... ...