
    Jose M. Lopez v. The State.
    No. 6778.
    Decided March 15, 1922.
    Felony Theft—Statement of Facts—Bills of Exception—-Practice on Appeal— Misconduct of Jury.
    Where the alleged statement of facts heard by the trial court, on motion for new trial because of the misconduct of the jury, was filed long after the expiration of the trial term, the same cannot be considered on appeal.
    Appeal from the District Court of Bexar. Tried below before# the Honorable W. S. Anderson.
    Appeal from a conviction of felony theft; penalty, three years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the case.
    No brief on file for appellant.
    
      R. G. Storey, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
   LATTIMORE, Judge.

—Appellant was convicted in the district court of Bexar county of the offense of theft of property of the value of more than fifty dollars, and his punishment fixed at three years in the penitentiary.

The record is before us without statement of facts or bills of exception. The indictment and charge of the court appear to be in conformity with law. Appellant’s motion for new trial was based upon alleged misconduct of the jury, and it appears that evidence was heard by the trial court in support of this motion. In order for us to properly decide whether a correct decision was had upon such hearing it has always been held necessary for the evidence adduced to be presented here by statement of - facts or bill of exceptions. There appears in the record what purports to be a statement of facts he/ard by the trial court, but same was filed long after the expiration of the trial term and for that reason cannot be considered by us.

No error appearing in the record, the# judgment of the trial court will be affirmed. . ...

Affirmed.  