Dehunt v. State

Decided June 23, 1911

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1911-06-23

Ckimikal Law (§ 1090*) — Review — Statement oe Pacts and Bills of Exceptions —Necessity. Refusal of a continuance is not reviewable, in the absence of a statement of facts and bills of exceptions. [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2812; Dec. Dig. § 1090.*)

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1911-06-23

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently June 1930

4 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DAVIDSON, P. J.

¶1Appellant was given three years in the penitentiary under an indictment charging him with burglary. There were no bills of exceptions reserved during the trial, at least, none were sent up in the record, and the transcript is unaccompanied by a statement of the facts upon which appellant was tried.

¶2The application for continuance, in the absence of a statement of the facts and bills of exceptions, cannot be reviewed. The matters complained of in the motion for new trial, in the absence of a statement of the facts, cannot be intelligently discussed or -reviewed.

¶3There being no error, as the record is presented, authorizing a reversal, the judgment is affirmed.