
    (106 So. 207)
    MITCHELL v. STATE.
    (4 Div. 188.)
    (Court of Appeals of Alabama.
    Nov. 10, 1925.)
    Criminal law &wkey;>l090(l4), 1122(5) — Refusal of requested charge, not reviewabie, in absence of bill of exceptions and oral charge.
    The action of the court in refusing charges requested by 'defendant is not reviewabie, in the absence of a bill of exceptions and the oral charge of the court.
    Appeal from Circuit Court, Pike County ; N. D. Denson, Judge.
    Ben Mitchell was convicted of arson in the first degree, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    D. A. Baker, of Troy, for appellant.
    Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for the State.
    No brief filed for either party.
   BRICKEN, P. J.

This appellant was charged with and convicted of the offense of arson in the first degree; the specific charge being that he willfully set fire to and burned a dwelling house of John Warren in which there was at the time a human being. The charge being what is known to our law as a capital offense, the jury were properly called upon to fix the punishment, which they did by their verdict; the punishment being 10 years’ imprisonment in the penitentiary, the minimum punishment provided by law for this offense. Prom the judgment of conviction, this appeal is taken.

There is no bill of exceptions in the transcript; the appeal therefore is predicated upon the record only. In the absence of a bill of exceptions and the oral'charge of .the court, the action of the court in refusing several charges to defendant is not reviewable.

No error is apparent on the record. The proceedings, so far as shown, appear regular in all respects.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed. 
      tg^For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     