From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Counts v. the State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Feb 10, 1897
37 Tex. Crim. 125 (Tex. Crim. App. 1897)

Opinion

No. 1084.

Decided February 10th, 1897.

Statement of Facts, Not Approved.

A statement of facts not signed by counsel, nor approved by the trial judge, will not be considered on appeal.

APPEAL from the County Court of Eastland. Tried below before Hon. G.W. DAKAN, County Judge.

Appeal from a conviction for a violation of local option; penalty, a fine of $25 and twenty days' imprisonment in the county jail.

No statement necessary.

No brief for appellant.

Nat. P. Jackson and Mann Trice, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State, filed an able brief, a large portion of which is copied, with approval, in the opinion.


Appellant was convicted of selling intoxicating liquors in a local option subdivision of Eastland County, and appeals. The transcript contains what purports to be a statement of facts. The statement of facts is not signed by counsel, nor approved by the judge. It concludes, "Yours, etc. S.C. Counts." We cannot consider the statement. There is but one question in the record, and that is as to the sufficiency of the information. "In the language of Mr. N.P. Jackson, who briefed the case for the State: "If the information is not sufficient, it ought to be. It is full enough for six, charging everything from organization of the county to notice of appeal in this case, including everything embraced in the local option law from the petition to the proclamation — all that Stewart's case, 35 Tex. Crim. 392, or that Steel's case (Tex.Crim. App.), 30 S.W. Rep., 1064, ever dreamed of. In fact, it contains everything it should, and a vast deal it could do without, but which does not hurt it. It's all right. In the matter complained of about the charge, I think the charge is satisfactory, in the absence of a statement of facts. It expounds the local option law most learnedly, in connection with a most exciting history of that branch of our jurisprudence, and is, in addition, most gravely and reverentially signed, 'Yours respectfully, G.W. Dakan, Co. Judge.' " There appearing no errors in the record, the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Counts v. the State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Feb 10, 1897
37 Tex. Crim. 125 (Tex. Crim. App. 1897)
Case details for

Counts v. the State

Case Details

Full title:S.C. COUNTS v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Feb 10, 1897

Citations

37 Tex. Crim. 125 (Tex. Crim. App. 1897)
38 S.W. 1024

Citing Cases

Oncor Elec. Delivery Co. NTU v. Mills Cent. Appraisal Dist.

The doctrine of mutual mistake has been recognized in Texas for at least 125 years. See, e.g.,Williams v.…

Kemp v. Everett

Here there is no effort shown on the part of appellant to have the court comply with his request during the…