
    Walter Bering v. The State.
    No. 3174.
    Decided June 17, 1914.
    Burglary—Indeterminate Sentence—Reforming Judgment.
    Where the lower court should have entered a judgment and sentence under the indeterminate sentence law, hut omitted to do so, the same will he reformed on appeal, and the cause affirmed.
    Appeal from the District Court of Tarrant. Tried below before the Hon. E. H. Buck.
    Appeal from a conv.' '' of burglary; penalty, five years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the case.
    Ho brief on file for appellant.
    
      G. E. Lane, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
   DAVIDS OH, Judge.

This record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. The conviction was for burglary, the jury assessing a punishment' of five years confinement in the penitentiary. In the judgment pronouncing sentence the court fixed a definite term of five years as found by the jury. This will be reformed under the indeterminate sentence law so as to fix the punishment at not less than two nor more than five years. With this correction and reforming of judgment and sentence, this judgment will be affirmed. The clerk will enter the proper correction reforming the sentence and judgment.

Sentence reformed.  