
    Luz Paiz v. The State.
    No. 3480.
    Decided April 17, 1907.
    Scire Facias—Statement of Facts—Twenty Day Order.
    In the absence of an order by the trial judge that the statement of facts may be filed within twenty days, the same cannot be considered on appeal, although the record showed that the defendant asked leave for such order.
    
      Appeal from the District Court of Duval. Tried below before the Hon. Stanley Welch.
    Appeal from a judgment nisi against appellant and his surety for the sum of $500.
    The opinion states the case.
    
      D. McN'eal Turner, for appellant.
    
      J. E. Yantis, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.
   BBOOKS, Judge.

This is a scire facias case, and the Assistant Attorney-General has filed a motion to strike out the statement of facts on the ground that there is no order authorizing the same to be filed after term time. In a clause of the order overruling motion in arrest of judgment appears this language: “It is further noted that said defendant asked leave for twenty days after the adjournment of this court in which to prepare and file a statement of facts and bills of exception.” But there is no order entered up by the court granting said leave. In the absence of an order from the district judge granting said twenty days the statement of facts cannot be considered. In the absence of a statement of facts we cannot consider appellant’s assignments of error.

Finding no error in the record, the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.  