162 S.W. 890 | Tex. Crim. App. | 1914
Appellant was convicted of assault to murder, his punishment being assessed at three years confinement in the penitentiary.
There is what purports to be a statement of facts accompanying the transcript; it is certified by the official stenographer of the District Court to be correct. It seems in its entirety to be made up by questions and answers; and further, it may be noted that the statement of facts is not approved either by counsel or by the trial court. Being in this condition, this court can not consider it as a statement of facts.
Appellant moved the court to submit the question of his former good character, and the fact that he had not been previously convicted of a felony as a predicate for a recommendation of the suspension of the execution of the judgment against him. The court submitted it to the jury and they found previous good character, and that he had not been previously convicted of a felony, but failed to recommend in the verdict that the execution of the judgment be suspended. This ruling of the court appellant contends was error. In Roberts v. State,
The other questions presented can not be revised in the absence of a statement of facts. As the record is presented to us the judgment will be affirmed.
Affirmed.