
    STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent, v. CHARLES WRIGHT, Appellant.
    St. Louis Court of Appeals,
    November 4, 1913.
    1. CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS: Appellate Practice: Duty of Court to Examine Record. On appeal by the defendant from a judgment of conviction in a criminal prosecution, it is the duty of the court, where a bill of exceptions is not filed, to examine the record proper for error, under Sec. 5312, R. S. 1909.
    2. PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS: Practicing Without License: Sufficiency of Information and Judgment. On appeal by defendant from a judgment of conviction under an information charging him with practicing medicine without a license, held that the information was sufficient, that the judgment was in due form, and that the record proper was otherwise free from error.
    Appeal from St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction. —Hon. Galvin N. Miller, Judge.
    Affirmed.
    No briefs filed.
   ALLEN, J.

The defendant was convicted of practicing medicine without a license. His punishment was assessed at imprisonment in the workhouse of the city of St. Louis for a term of three months, and he appeals.

No hill of exceptions was filed, and there is nothing hut the record proper before us. It is our duty, however, under the law, to examine the record and render judgment thereupon. This we have done and find no error therein. The information is sufficient to sustain the conviction, and the judgment is in due form. The judgment of the' court of criminal correction is therefore affirmed.

Reynolds, P. J., and Nortoni, J., concur.  