
    WALKER v. STATE.
    (No. 9093.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    March 18, 1925.)
    Criminal iaw <@=>1099(7, 19) — Statement of facts not considered on appeal, where unsigned by trial judge, and not tiled in time.
    Statement of facts, which was not filed in trial court and reached appellate court 11 months after adjournment of trial court, unsigned by trial judge, could not be considered, in view of Vernon’s Ann. Code Or. Proc. 1916, arts. 844a-S45, and article 844e, fact that accused was tried without counsel and was financially unable to employ counsel to perfect appeal being insufficient to negative lack of required diligence.
    Appeal from District Court, Culberson County; W. D. Howe, Judge.
    Thomas Walker was convicted of forgery, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    W. L. Zackary, of El Paso, for appellant.
    Tom Garrard, State’s Atty., and Grover C. Morris, Asst. State’s Atty., both of Austin, for the State.
   MORROW, P. J.

The offense is forgery; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of five years.

The case was tried at the term of cqurt concluding on the 14th day of April, 1924. We fail to find any statement of facts prepared and verified in compliance with the statutes of this state so as to authorize its consideration. The document purporting to serve as a statement of facts contains neither the agreement of counsel nor certificate of the trial judge. Nor does it appear to have been filed in the trial court. It reached this court on March 9, 1925, about 11 months after the adjournment of the term of . court, at which the case was tried. The documents at? tached to it appear to bear a date in February, 1926.

A motion to permit the’ document to be filed and used as a statement of facts is found among the papers. In it, it is said in substance that the district attorney and the trial judge had declined to sign the document because not presented in time, and that the appellant was tried without counsel and was financially unable to employ counsel to perfect his appeal.

The statute requires that the statemd 90 days from the date of the adjournment of the term at which the trial took place. See Vernon’s Tex. Grim. Stat. vol. 2. arts. 844a to 845. To permit consideration, the statement must, in all eases, be approved by the trial judge. C. C. P. art. 844c. Where diligence upon the part of the accused is shown, the statement of facts may be considered though not filed within the time prescribed by law. See George v. State, 25 Tex. App. 229, 8 S. W. 25, and other cases listed-in Vernon’s Tex. Crim. Stat. vol. 2, p. 837, note 20.

In the present instance, however, diligence of the appellant is not shown, nor does the< record reveal any negligence upon the part of the court officials. It must be ascribed to the appellant.

Our attention has been drawn to no fault in the indictment; neither have we observed any. We find no complaint of the rulings of the trial court preserved by bills of exception.

The judgment is affirmed. 
      «gzwFor other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     