Snider v. StateSnider v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Draper
The appellant, was charged with driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating- liquor. He was tried by jury and found guilty. Appellant’s motion for new trial was overruled, and he appeals. 1
A determination of the alleged errors assigned in appellant’s motion for new trial would require a consideration of matters which could only be shown by a bill of exceptions. The record contains no bill of exceptions “signed by the judge and filed with the clerk” as required by Rule 2-3 of this court. Thus, no question *504 has been presented to this court, and the judgment must be affirmed.
So ordered.
Flanagan, C. J., Bobbitt, Emmert and Gilkison, JJ., concur.
Note. — Reported in 121 N. E. 2d 731.
Notes
. No judgment on the verdict had been rendered when the original transcript was filed. In accordance with Rule 2-3 of this court, we retained jurisdiction of the appeal and suspended consideration thereof until judgment was shown to have been rendered as evidenced by the filing here of a duly certified copy thereof. See Wilson v. State (1953), 232 Ind. 495, 112 N. E. 2d 449.