Morris v. State
| Decision Date | 18 October 1911 |
| Citation | 140 S.W. 775 |
| Parties | MORRIS v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from Hardeman County Court; W. S. Banister, Judge.
Bob Morris was convicted of violating the local option law, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Fires, Decker, Clarke & John, for appellant. C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Appellant was prosecuted under complaint and information for selling intoxicating liquors in Hardeman county, a county where the local prohibition law is in force. He was convicted, and his punishment assessed at confinement in the county jail for 30 days and a fine of $50.
The Assistant Attorney General moves to strike out the statement of facts and bills of exception herein filed, because not approved and filed within the time permitted by law. The term of the county court at which appellant was tried adjourned on the 11th day of March, 1911. The statement of facts was not filed until the 17th day of April. The bills of exception were filed also on the 17th day of April, more than 20 days subsequent to the adjournment of court. The official stenographers' act passed by the Thirty-First Legislature does not apply to criminal cases in county court, and the trial court is without power to extend the time beyond the limit fixed by chapter 7 of the Acts of the First Called Session of the Thirtieth Legislature. See Acts of 30th Leg. p. 446. The motion of the Assistant Attorney General is sustained.
We would again call attention to the difference in procedure, as provided by statute, in criminal cases of the grade of felony, tried in district court, where the official stenographers' act provides for a stenographer, and also provides for an extension of time in those cases, and in misdemeanor cases tried in county court. By reference to the acts of the Thirtieth and Thirty-First Legislatures, it will be seen that no stenographer is contemplated in criminal cases in county court, and the law applicable to this class of cases was not changed by the official stenographers' act.
In criminal cases tried in district courts the statement of facts must be filed in duplicate, and the original sent to this court for its inspection. In criminal cases tried in county court the statement of facts need not be filed in duplicate, and must be copied in the transcript. We regret that, owing to this difference in procedure being provided by statute, parties desiring to appeal their cases in a number of instances have their statement of facts...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lee v. State
...155 S. W. 222; Chaney v. State, 62 Tex. Cr. R. 67, 136 S. W. 482; Whitaker v. State, 62 Tex. Cr. R. 36, 136 S. W. 1072; Morris v. State, 63 Tex. Cr. R. 375, 140 S. W. 775; Farrell v. State, 64 Tex. Cr. R. 200, 141 S. W. 535; Hall v. State, 70 Tex. Cr. R. 240, 156 S. W. 644; Mueller v. State......
-
Drake v. State
...the more recent ones. Looper v. State (two cases) 136 S. W. 791; Carney v. State, 140 S. W. 440; Wagoner v. State, 140 S. W. 339; Morris v. State, 140 S. W. 775; Brogdon v. State, 140 S. W. 352; Jenkins v. State (two cases) 141 S. W. 222, 223; Skinner v. State, 141 S. W. The only questions ......
-
Martin v. State
...by article 844, C. C. P., and the motion of the Assistant Attorney General that it be disregarded must be sustained. Morris v. State, 63 Tex. Cr. R. 375, 140 S. W. 775; Salinas v. State, 142 S. W. The instrument declared on is as follows: "Fort Worth, Texas, May 4, 1918. Received of the For......