
    Jim Vitrano v. The State.
    No. 7264.
    Decided May 30, 1923.
    Rehearing denied October 17, 1923.
    1. —Assault to Murder — Requested Charges.
    In the absence of a showing in the record that the requested charges were presented to the trial judge before he gave his main charge to the jury, and in the absence of any exception taken to any of the court’s action, it cannot b& considered on appeal. Following Barrios v. State, 204 S. W. Rep., 326.
    2. —Same—Bill of Exceptions — Practice on Appeal.
    In the absence of a bill of exceptions to the admission of evidence, the matter cannot be reviewed on appeal.
    Appeal from the District Court of Galveston. Tried below before the Honorable J. C. Canty.
    Appeal from a conviction of assault to murder; penalty, two years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
    The. opinion states the case.
    
      Marsene Johnson, Elmo Johnson, Roy Johnson, and Marsene Johnson, Jr., for appellant.
    
      R. G. Storey, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
    
      [Rehearing denied October 17, 1923. Reporter.]
   MORROW, Presiding Judge.

— The offense is assault with intent to murder; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of two years.

The evidence, without controversy, shows that the appellant, using a pistol, shot Pina Gaetano, the person named in the indictment.

Appellant testified, justifying his act upon the ground that Gaetano was armed with a knife and was about to use it against the appellant. The State’s theory to the contrary was supported by several eye-witnesses. Whether this was true was for the jury to determine.

We have discerned no fault in the charge of the court and find no exceptions reserved to it at the time of the trial. Some special charges were requested and refused. To authorize their consideration, the law requires that they be presented to the trial judge before he gives his charge to the jury and that if refused, exception shall be taken thereto. The record does not show that either of these things was done. See Nichols v. State, 91 Texas Crim. Rep., 277, 238 S. W. Rep. 232; Barrios v. State, 83 Texas Crim. Rep., 548, 204 S. W. Rep., 326.

There is no bill of exceptions complaining of the ruling of the trial court in the admission or rejection of evidence. No error is found in the record. The evidence supports the verdict. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.  