Criner v. State
| Decision Date | 08 October 1913 |
| Citation | 159 S.W. 1059 |
| Parties | CRINER v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Henderson County; John S. Prince, Judge.
Sanko Criner was convicted of forgery; and he appeals. Affirmed.
Miller & Miller, of Athens, for appellant. C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The appellant appeals from a conviction for forgery with the lowest penalty prescribed by law fixed as his punishment.
There is no statement of facts with the record. There is the stenographer's report of the trial of the case, made out in question and answer form, including objections, arguments of attorneys for both sides on the objections, the remarks and rulings of the court, and such other matters as are taken down by court stenographers on the trial of the case. This, we presume, is intended as a statement of facts.
Under the statutes of this state and the many and uniform decisions of this court, this document cannot be considered by this court as a statement of facts. Hargrave v. State, 53 Tex. Cr. R. 148, 109 S. W. 163; Essary v. State, 53 Tex. Cr. R. 596, 111 S. W. 927; Baird v. State, 51 Tex. Cr. R. 324, 101 S. W. 991; Brown v. State, 57 Tex. Cr. R. 269, 122 S. W. 565; King v. State, 57 Tex. Cr. R. 369, 123 S. W. 135; Kemper v. State, 57 Tex. Cr. R. 356, 123 S. W. 131; Felder v. State, 59 Tex. Cr. R. 144, 127 S. W. 1055; Choate v. State, 59 Tex. Cr. R. 266, 128 S. W. 624. Many other cases might be cited, but we deem it unnecessary.
The questions attempted to be raised by appellant cannot be considered in the absence of a statement of facts.
The judgment is therefore affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cooley v. State
...prepared shall comply with this law; otherwise such statement of facts will be struck out and not considered by this court. Criner v. State, 159 S. W. 1059, and cases cited There is nothing else requiring any discussion or decision in this case. For the error above pointed out, the judgment......