
    (92 South. 94)
    RAMSEY v. STATE.
    (7 Div. 726.)
    (Court of Appeals of Alabama.
    Jan. 31, 1922.)
    1. Criminal law <&wkey;l092(7) — Bill of exceptions, not approved within required time, will be stricken.
    Bill of exceptions, not approved within 90 clays from the date it was presented, under Code 1907, §§ 3019, 3020, will be stricken.
    2. Criminal law &wkey;>l090(I4)— Refusal of instructions not considered, in absence of bill of exceptions.
    In the absence of a bill of exceptions, the Court of Appeals will not review the action of the trial court in refusing instructions.
    Appeal from Circuit Court, Etowah County; O. A. Steele, Judge.
    John Ramsey was convicted of larceny, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    ' E. O. McCord & Son, of Gadsden, for appellant.
    Brief of counsel did not reach the Reporter.
    Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and Lamar Field, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
    The bill of exceptions should.be stricken. Sections 3019 and 3022, Code 1907. In the absence of the bill of exceptions, the court will not review charges refused. 73 South. 748.
   MERRITT, J.

The motion of the appellee to strike the bill of exceptions in this cause must prevail. The record shows that it was not approved within 90 days from the date it was presented. Sections 3019 and 3020, Code 1907. The ’ appellant was convicted under a complaint which charged him with larceny, and with buying, concealing, receiving,-, or aiding in concealing stolen' property. >-

There being no bill of exceptions, we will not review the action of the trial court in refusing certain written instructions requested by the defendant. Moran v. State, 15 Ala. App. 379, 73 South. 748, 13 Mich. Digest, p. 795, § 712. We have examined the record and find no reversible error.

The judgment appealed from must therefore be affirmed.

Affirmed. 
      ©=»For other oases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     