Johnson v. State, 14375.

• Decision Date: 17 June 1931
• Docket Number: No. 14375.,14375.
• Parties: JOHNSON v. STATE.
• Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

42 S.W.2d 420

JOHNSON v. STATE.

No. 14375.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 17, 1931.

Rehearing Denied October 21, 1931.

Appeal from Criminal District Court, Jefferson County; R. L. Murray, Judge.

Willie Johnson was convicted for receiving and concealing stolen property, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

David E. O'Fiel, of Beaumont, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.

LATTIMORE, J.

Conviction for receiving and concealing stolen property; punishment, two years in the penitentiary.

The record appears in an unfortunate condition, disclosing quite a controversy. The court declined to approve the statement of facts prepared by appellant's counsel, and filed one of his own. Appellant's counsel was dissatisfied with that filed by the court, and filed one of his own. The court declined to approve the single bill of exception prepared by appellant, and filed his own bill. Appellant was dissatisfied with the court's bill, and attempts to file a bystanders' bill. The whole controversy revolves around the statement of facts and some exculpatory statements claimed by appellant to have been made by witnesses which do not appear in the statement of facts prepared by the court. We have examined all of the documents, but fail to see how the contention between the trial court and counsel for appellant could affect the decision of this case. Appellant pleaded guilty, thereby admitting all of the material facts alleged in the indictment. Upon his plea of guilty, the jury found him guilty, and gave him the lowest penalty for the offense charged. They could have done no more for him had the proceedings been as contended by appellant's counsel in his controversy with the trial court.

The judgment will be affirmed.

On Motion for Rehearing.

MORROW, P. J.

It appears that counsel for the state and the accused could not agree upon a statement of facts. Appellant's counsel presented to the trial judge a statement of facts which the judge declined to approve, but prepared and filed his own statement of facts. Appellant excepted to the action of the court in the procedure mentioned. The court declined to approve the appellant's bill of exception, and prepared his own bill, in which it is stated that there was presented to him a statement of facts which had not been approved by state's counsel; that he did not approve it, but prepared and filed one of his own. In a bystanders' bill it is stated that the testimony heard upon the trial was not taken down by the court stenographer, and that in the...