
    TEMPLETON v. STATE.
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    June 25, 1913.)
    Criminal Law (§ 814) — Instructions—Applicability to Evidence.
    Requested instructions, not applicable to the evidence introduced, were properly refused.
    [Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§, 1821,1833, 1839, 1860, 1865, 1883, 1890, 1924, 1979-1985, 1987; Dec. Dig. § 814.]
    Appeal from Throckmorton County Court; T. J. Wright, Judge.
    F. Templeton was convicted of catching fish within an inclosure without the consent of the owner, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
    
      
       For other eases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. KeyTNo. Series & Rep’r Indexes
    
   HARPER, J.

Appellant was prosecuted and convicted of catching fish within the inclosure of W. E. Jarmon without the consent of the owner.

Appellant filed a motion to quash the information and complaint, on the ground that the act upon which it was based has been repealed by a subsequent act of the Legislature. We held adversely to appellant’s contention in the case of Berry v. State, 156 S. W. 626, recently decided, but not yet officially reported. The statement of facts was not filed in time; but, if we could consider it, the evidence supports the verdict. The special charges, Nos. 1 and 2, requested, were not applicable to the evidence introduced, and the court did not err in refusing them.

The judgment is affirmed.  