
    BROWN v. STATE.
    (No. 10109.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    June 2, 1926.)
    1. Criminal law &wkey;>l092(9) — Where 90 days were allowed after notice of appeal within which to file statement of facts, statement and bills of exceptions filed during 30 days’ extension of time cannot be considered (Code Cr. Proc. 1925, art. 760).
    Where 90 days were allowed after notice of appeal within which to file statement of facts, statement and bills of exceptions filed during 30 days’ extension of time cannot be considered in view of Code Cr. Proc. 1925, art. 760, providing that time shall not be so extended as to prevent filing within 90 days.
    2. Criminal law <&wkey;>ll82.
    Where indictment is regular, and no facts or complaints of procedure are properly before court, judgment of conviction will be affirmed.
    Appeal from District Court, Jefferson County; Geo. C. O’Brien, Judge.
    Ralph Brown was convicted of unlawfully manufacturing intoxicating liquor, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Blain-& Jones, of Beaumont, for appellant.
    Sam D. Stinson, State’s Atty., of Austin, and Robt. M. Lyles,- Asst. State’s Atty., of Groesbeck, for the State.
   MORROW, P. J.

The offense is the unlawful manufacture of intoxicating liquor; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for one year.

Notice of appeal was entered on the 22d of October, 1925. Ninety days were allowed within which to file a statement of facts. The statement and the bills of exceptions were filed February 13, 1926. On January 13, 1926, an additional allowance of time of 30 days was made. The statute permitting the' extension of time (article 760, C. C. P. Rev. of 1925) concludes with these words:

“ * * * But the same shall not be so extended as to delay the filing thereof within ninety days from the date the notice of appeal is given.”

Observance of this statutory provision compels this court to sustain the objection of the state’s attorney to the consideration of the statement of facts and bills of exceptions.

The indictment appears regular, and there being no facts or complaints of the procedure properly before this court, it has no chance but to order that the judgment be affirmed.

It is so ordered.  