From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beddingfield v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Apr 22, 1936
93 S.W.2d 738 (Tex. Crim. App. 1936)

Opinion

No. 18349.

Delivered April 22, 1936.

Affidavit — Statement of Facts.

Defendant's affidavit in record on appeal, to the effect that he was unable to pay for statement of facts, or give security therefor held not to warrant reversal of conviction on the ground that defendant had been deprived of statement of facts, where there was nothing in record to show that affidavit was called to the attention of trial judge.

Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2, Harris County. Tried below before the Hon. Langston G. King, Judge.

Appeal from conviction for burglary; penalty, confinement in penitentiary for two years.

Affirmed.

The opinion states the case.

Bailey Blum, of Houston, for appellant.

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


The offense is burglary; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception.

We find in the record an affidavit on the part of appellant to the effect that he was unable to pay for a statement of facts or give security therefor. There is nothing in the record to show that said affidavit was called to the attention of the trial judge. It follows that a reversal of the judgment on the ground that appellant has been deprived of a statement of facts would not be warranted.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.


Summaries of

Beddingfield v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Apr 22, 1936
93 S.W.2d 738 (Tex. Crim. App. 1936)
Case details for

Beddingfield v. State

Case Details

Full title:SHERMAN BEDDINGFIELD v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Apr 22, 1936

Citations

93 S.W.2d 738 (Tex. Crim. App. 1936)
93 S.W.2d 738

Citing Cases

Stockman v. State

There is nothing to show that said affidavit was called to the attention of the trial judge. It follows that…

Moore v. State

There appears in the supplemental transcript an affidavit filed in the trial court setting up the inability…