Wells v. State

Decided February 15, 1911

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1911-02-15

1. Criminal Law (§ 1097*) — Appeal—Statement of Facts — Necessity. Unless instructions are so fundamentally erroneous that they would be inapplicable to any evidence admissible under the indictment, they cannot be reviewed, in absence of a statement of facts. [Ed. Note. — For other eases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2862; Dec. Dig. § 1097.*] 2. Criminal Law (§ 1090*) — Appeau—Statement of Facts. In absence of a bill of exceptions and statement of facts in the record on a criminal appeal, a ruling denying a continuance cannot be reviewed. [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2812; Dec. Dig. § 1090.*] 3. Ceiminal Law (§ 1094*) — Appeai>-Dis-POSITION — AFFIRMANCE — INSUFFICIENT Presentation on Appeal. A judgment of conviction will be affirmed, where, because of the absence of a statement of facts and bills of exceptions, the alleged errors cannot be reviewed. [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2S07, 3204; Dec. Dig. § 1094.*]

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently August 1985

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1911-02-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DAVIDSON, P. J.

¶1Appellant was convicted of murder in the first degree; his punishment being assessed at life imprisonment.

¶2The record contains neither a statement of the facts nor bills of exceptions. The matters set forth in the motion for new trial, in this condition of the. record, are not so presented that they can be intelligently revised.

¶3The charge contained in the record is applicable to a state of facts which could have been shown before the jury. In order to intelligently review a criticism of the charge, the statement of facts must be before the court, unless the charge is so fundamentally erroneous that it would not be applicable to any state of case that would be authorized by the indictment.

¶4The ruling of the court in refusing the continuance, in the absence of the facts and bills of exceptions, cannot be revised.

¶5As the matter is presented by this record, we cannot review them, and the judgment is therefore affirmed.