Couch v. State, 26178
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas |
| Writing for the Court | MORRISON |
| Citation | 255 S.W.2d 223,158 Tex.Crim. 292 |
| Parties | COUCH v. STATE. |
| Docket Number | No. 26178,26178 |
| Decision Date | 25 February 1953 |
Page 223
v.
STATE.
[158 Tex.Crim. 293]
Page 224
Grady Hazlewood, Amarillo, for appellant.H. C. Pipkin, Jr., Dist. Atty., Amarillo, George P. Blackburn, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
MORRISON, Judge.
The offense is murder; the punishment, life.
The appellant does not question the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction, but because it is the policy of this Court to always pass upon the same where properly before us, we make the following explanation of our inability to do so in the case at bar.
The statement of facts found in the record does not bear the approval of the trial judge, nor is it agreed to by appellant or his counsel, or by the attorney representing the State, the only manner authorized by Article 759a, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P., for authenticating this document.
Appellant would have us consider the statement of facts upon his showing that the trial judge and the district attorney now agree that they would approve the same if it were presented to them.
We are not at liberty to ignore the statute which requires [158 Tex.Crim. 294] the approved statement of facts to be filed in the trial court within ninety days after notice of appeal.
We have considered statements of facts not so approved and filed, and have ordered reversals upon the grounds that an appellant has been deprived of a statement of facts, but only upon a satisfactory showing that the accused and his counsel have exercised diligence in the matter and that the failure to secure the approval and file the statement of facts in time has been due to no fault or negligence on their part.
There is no showing that appellant or his counsel has been deprived of a statement
Page 225
of facts which can be considered by this Court or that diligence has been used in an effort to secure the court's approval of the statement of facts.Under similar facts, we recently held, in Nelson v. State, Tex.Cr.R., 257 S.W.2d 306, that the statement of facts could not be considered.
The only questions urged by appellant relate to the prosecutor's argument and his cross-examination of appellant.
Bill of exception No. 1 purports to complain of the opening argument of the district attorney. We find nothing improper in the argument as such.
The bill further complains that the district attorney referred to the prison record of appellant during the course of such argument. As to the objection interposed to such argument,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nichols v. State, 46088
...86 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Bustillos v. State, supra; King v. State, 425 S.W.2d 356 (Tex.Cr.App.1968) and Couch v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 292, 255 S.W.2d 223 (1953). Since the appellant had not reformed, the prior felony conviction was also admissible. Williams v. State, 449 S.W.2d 264 (Tex.Cr.App......
-
Timmons v. State, 56538
...that the burden is on an appellant to establish that he had been deprived of his statement of facts. Couch v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 292, 255 S.W.2d 223, 224 (1953). To be entitled to a reversal of judgment of conviction where the statement of facts is not filed, an appellant must show due di......
-
Adams v. State Bd. of Insurance, 13278
...Dillard v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 218 S.W.2d 476; Toms v. State, 150 Tex.Cr.R. 264, 200 S.W.2d 174; Couch v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 292, 255 S.W.2d 223. In the case of Carr v. De Witt, Tex.Civ.App., 171 S.W.2d 388, 390, the court 'Some authorities hold that ten or more years subsequent to a conv......
-
Travelers Ins. Co. v. Dunn, 5661
...actual party or defendant, rather than a witness. For example, in his reply brief the appellant cites Couch v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 292, 255 S.W.2d 223 (1953), wherein the Court of Criminal Appeals says: 'It is now well settled that the time of release from confinement rather than the time ......
-
Nichols v. State, 46088
...86 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Bustillos v. State, supra; King v. State, 425 S.W.2d 356 (Tex.Cr.App.1968) and Couch v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 292, 255 S.W.2d 223 (1953). Since the appellant had not reformed, the prior felony conviction was also admissible. Williams v. State, 449 S.W.2d 264 (Tex.Cr.App......
-
Timmons v. State, 56538
...that the burden is on an appellant to establish that he had been deprived of his statement of facts. Couch v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 292, 255 S.W.2d 223, 224 (1953). To be entitled to a reversal of judgment of conviction where the statement of facts is not filed, an appellant must show due di......
-
Adams v. State Bd. of Insurance, 13278
...Dillard v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 218 S.W.2d 476; Toms v. State, 150 Tex.Cr.R. 264, 200 S.W.2d 174; Couch v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 292, 255 S.W.2d 223. In the case of Carr v. De Witt, Tex.Civ.App., 171 S.W.2d 388, 390, the court 'Some authorities hold that ten or more years subsequent to a conv......
-
Travelers Ins. Co. v. Dunn, 5661
...actual party or defendant, rather than a witness. For example, in his reply brief the appellant cites Couch v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 292, 255 S.W.2d 223 (1953), wherein the Court of Criminal Appeals says: 'It is now well settled that the time of release from confinement rather than the time ......