151 Ind. 485 | Ind. | 1898
The appellee was prosecuted for the crime of larceny, in the Johnson Circuit Court, and was acquitted. The State appeals, and assigns as error the refusal to give the following instruction: “I
The evidence is not in the record, nor is there any statement in the bill of exceptions or in the record, showing that this instruction was relevant to the evidence, and hence no question of law is presented for decision. Without some statement of the evidence, we must presume that the instruction was refused because there was no evidence' to which it was applicable.
While it is true that it is neither necessary. nor proper, in appeafs by the State, to set forth the evidence in full, it is also true that there must be some statement in the bill of exceptions showing that there was evidence to which the instructions were relevant. It is a well established principle in appellate procedure that the court will not decide mere abstract questions, and, where there are no facts stated, nothing but abstract questions can in such a case as, this arise upon a ruling refusing instructions.’ State v. Kern, 127 Ind. 465.
The giving of an instruction is assigned by the State as error, reading as follows: “The names of the persons who are alleged to be the owners of the money