
    (92 South. 26)
    DAVIS v. STATE.
    (6 Div. 940.)
    (Court of Appeals of Alabama.
    Jan. 17, 1922.)
    Criminal law <&wkey;l 116 — Overruling of motion to quash complaint not considered where motion not in record.
    The Court of Appeals cannot review alleged error in overruling defendant’s motion to quash complaint, where the motion to quash is not set out in the record, since in such case the court is unable to ascertain its contents.
    Appeal from Circuit Court, Tuscaloosa County; Henry B. Foster, Judge.
    J. L. Davis was convicted of failing or refusing to dip tick-infested cattle, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for the State.
    Ho brief reached the Reporter.
   MERRITT, J.

The appellant, on appeal from the county court, was convicted in the circuit court of Tuscaloosa county, Ala., under a complaint which charged:

“That he did have in bis possession or in bis charge as owner,' agent, or otherwise, one or more cattle in a tick-infested or quarantine premise, range, farm, or pasture, that has not been released from state and federal quarantine; that he failed to dip said quarantined animal after receiving legal notice regularly once every two weeks on the day and at the vat specified by the inspector in charge.”

The judgment entry recites the overruling . of the defendant’s motion to quash the complaint. The motion to quash, however, is not set out in the record, and, not being able to ascertain its contents, we are unable to say that the trial court was in error in overruling it. There is no bill of exceptions, and the time for filing one has expired.

We find no error in the record, and the judgment , appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed. 
      &wkey;>For other eases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER, in all Key-Numhered Digests and Indexes
     