
    WEBB v. STATE.
    (No. 10227.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    June 2, 1926.)
    1. Criminal law &wkey;>l038(3).
    In misdemeanor case, one complaining of refusal of special charge must both object to court’s charge and supplement same by special charges.
    2. Criminal law <S&wkey;1114(2) — Conviction of misdemeanor will be affirmed where no statement of facts or bills of exception were filed save one complaining of refusal of special charge, thus preventing court from determining applicability of charge requested.
    Where appellant from misdemeanor conviction filed no statement of facts and no bills of exceptions, except one complaining of refusal of special charge, thus preventing court from appraising applicability of charge requested, judgment will be affirmed.
    
      /?l — .TT'iyr other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
    Appeal from Polk County Court; E. T. Murphy, Judge.
    Palmer Webb was convicted of child desertion, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    S. E. Hill and Cade Bethea, both of Livingston, for appellant.
    Sam D. Stinson, State’s Atty., of Austin, and Robt. M. Lyles, Asst. State’s Atty., of Groesbeck, for the State.
   HAWKINS, J.

Conviction is for child desertion, punishment being assessed at 30 days’ confinement in the county jail.

No statement .of facts accompanies the record, and there are no bills of exception save one complaining of the refusal of a special charge. No exceptions were filed to the charge given, and, this being a misdemeanor case, it is necessary both to object to the court’s charge and supplement the same by special charges intended to cover any omission in the main charge.

Eor that reason, and the additional one that in the absence of the facts proven this court .is not able to appraise the applicability of the charge requested, no error is shown, and the judgment is affirmed.  