*1 502 Reports. 87 [June, Criminal Texas premeditation. points Stewart the to "Wade contends evidence that no wrongful participation part, insisting his that in the conflict on responded he aggressive but the un- to of the deceased the acts On disputed by facts might jury are a there inferences that be drawn favorable to the relators, undisputed and on is a the facts not there of evidence as on conflict such the whole did not warrant record the by judge proof guilty conclusion the trial that the relators that were capital of a was crime evident. denying
The order bail reversed, is granted therefore and bail to each of the in the sum upon making relators of of $10,000, the which under law discharge terms with surety, of sufficient their is the. ordered. granted.
Bail Thompkins Arthur v. The State. 23,
No. 5874. Decided June 1920. Appeal—Bills Exception —Theft—Sentence—Practice or. 1. of sentence, judgment, necessary being juris- The the final is attach the to appeal besides, felony cases; judgment diction this court in of of the will exception be of affirmed because the in bills were not time. filed to 2.—Motion Reinstate—Rule Stated—Certiorari. jurisdiction judgments expi- The of court over its this ceases at it would the term, extend, ration of the it seems the but under statute that or extend, by beyond
might days its termination reason of fifteen the after the and, judgment adjournment term; of the rendition or the the where for days thirty was the motion to re-instate more than filed rendition after the adjournment court, judgment, the the of sam came and after of the term this of the considered, too late cannot be and the certiorari and be cannot legally awarded. from District of Appeal the Court Newton. Tried below before J. T. Adams. Honorable the felony theft; penalty, from a of
Appeal years conviction two im- penitentiary. in the prisonment opinion
The states the case. Shaw, appellant. for
A. L. General, Attorney Owsley, M. Assistant for Alvin the State. Presiding Judge. DAVIDSON, This conviction was for theft, years penitentiary being punishment in the the two assessed. appeal must be dismissed because The the record does not contain sentence, being a the sentence. The final judgment, is necessary to Thompkins 503 The State. v. 1920} felony cases. Collated appeal court in jurisdiction the of this attach 853, Art. C., P.,C. may p. 338, in P. cases Branch’s C. be found *2 in record omission the Ann. 851. But for this p. Vernon’s C. P.. C. on exception taken bills of judgment The two the should be affirmed. ad- purpose. that granted in for Court the trial are not filed time thirty days in which bills journed granted March 20th. The court early in might bills not filed until exception of be The were filed. therefore, part May. not, of be considered. and could appeal The is dismissed.
Dismissed. REINSTATE APPEAL. MOTION TO ON 13, 1920. October Presiding Judge. of this On the 23rd June last DAVIDSON. opinion. in reasons stated the This court appeal was dismissed for 25, Under' the law court adjourned for term on 1920. this the June jurisdiction on over its cases of this character would have motions for judgment. jurisdiction, days the rendition of the Its fifteen after term, adjournment judgments of of the over after the the court would days. expiration of The to cease at the the fifteen rule seem would term, court, general rule, during the as a be different the because has during jurisdiction judgments the of over its existence term. its jurisdiction judgments expiration term, ceases the over at of the Its jurisdiction by that the but it would seem the statute of this court beyond might by extend its extend or termination of would reason days The above mentioned. record shows that man- the fifteen the day July, which expiration 9th of was after the date issued on the filing days rehearing. allowed for motions for of the fifteen The July not was filed until 26th. which motion to re-instate was more thirty judgment, of the days after the rendition nearly than and a month, adjournment a month after the- of the term or about of court. jurisdiction seem to limit the of the court The statute would such in days judgment, after the rendition of the to fifteen or at matters any days adjournment than in event after the not fifteen later least The motion to re-instaté comes too late. There is no of the term why the was not stated motion filed earlier or sufficient reason within days by time, is, allowed law. Appellant within fifteen that the now pronounced against was in fact a sentence alleges there that him proper which he tried and during appeal term at was notice of the his motion considered it In order to have to us given. he occurs must terms the law in order brought juris- the of to invoke within the be regard in to such action. this court of diction late, Believing motion comes too and the that the that certiorari motion legally awarded, to re-instate is the be therefore over- cannot ruled.
Overruled