
    ALBIDREZ v. STATE.
    (No. 11311.)
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Oct 12, 1927.
    Appeal Reinstated and Affirmed Nov. 16, 1927.
    1. Bail c&wkey;7G — Court of Criminal Appeals acquires no jurisdiction under appeal bond given by defendant during term of court at'whieh he was tried (Code Cr. Proc. 1925, arts. 816, 818).
    Court of Criminal Appeals acquires no jurisdiction of an appeal under Code Cr. Proc. 1925, arts. 816, 818, where an appeal bond is given by defendant during the term of court at which he was tried.
    On Motion for Rehearing.
    2. Criminal law t&wkey;l090(l4) — Instructions criticized in motion for new trial are not reviewable in absence of bills of exception and statement of facts.
    Objections to instructions in motion for new trial are not reviewable, where transcript contains no bills of exception, and is accompanied by no statement of. facts, applicability of instructions to facts not being ascertainable, in absence of evidence.
    Commissioners’ Decision.
    Appeal from District Court, Lubbock County ; Homer L. Pharr, Judge.
    Dan Albidrez was convicted of selling spirituous, vinous, and malt liquors containing in excess of one per cent, of alcohol by volume, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Marshall & Stewart, of Lubbock, for appellant.
    Sam D. Stinson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.
   CHRISTIAN, J.

The offense is the sale of spirituous, vinous, and malt liquors containing in excess of one per cent, of alcohol by volume; the punishment confinement in the penitentiary for one year.

The record discloses that the term of court at which appellant was tried ended on the 21st day of May, 1927, and that, on the 19th day of May, 1927, before the adjournment of the court for the term, appellant entered into an appeal bond, which was approved by the sheriff and the court. Under articles 816 and 818, C. C. P., the Court of Criminal Appeals acquires no jurisdiction of an appeal where an appeal bond is given by appellant during the term of court. Lang v. State, 80 Tex. Cr. R. 272, 190 S. W. 146; Hale v. State, 87 Tex. Cr. R. 119, 219 S. W. 1097.

Tbé appeal is dismissed.

PER OURIAM. The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.

On Motion for Rehearing.

MORROW, P. J.

By a supplemental transcript, the caption has been amended, and now shows that the court adjourned on the 14th of May, which was before the appeal bond mentioned in the original opinion was filed. The order of dismissal is set aside, and the appeal reinstated.

Considering the merits of the appeal, it appears that the transcript contains no bills of exceptions, and is accompanied by no statement of facts. In the absence of these, there are no questions presented requiring review. In the motion for new trial the charge of the court is criticized, but, in the absence of the evidence adduced upon the trial, the applicability of the court’s charge to the facts before it is not ascertainable on appeal.

The judgment is affirmed. 
      gu^Eor other eases see same topio and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     