
    FITZHUGH v. STATE.
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Nov. 12, 1913.)
    Criminal Daw (§ 1114) —Appeal — Questions Presented for Review-Limitation by Scope oe Record.
    Where the only ground assigned in the motion for a new trial of a criminal case is that the verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence, and there is neither a statement of facts nor bills of exception in the record, no question is presented for review.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2918, 2921; Dec. Dig'. § 1114.]
    Appeal from Dallas County Court, at Law; W. F. Whitehurst, Judge.
    Ed. E. Fitzhugh, Jr., was convicted of swindling in an amount less than $50, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic and section N UMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No. Series & Rep’r Indexes
    
   HARPER, J.

Appellant was convicted of swindling, in an amount less than $50, a misdemeanor.

There is neither a statement of facts nor bills of exception in the record. The only ground assigned in the motion for a new trial is, “because the verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence.” In the absence of a statement of facts there is nothing presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.  