
    Frank Begonia v. The State.
    No. 6022.
    Decided December 16, 1920.
    Forgery—Motion for New Trial—Statement of Facts—Practice on Appeal.
    Where, upon appeal from a conviction of forgery, the motion for new trial mentioned bills of exception as having been taken during the trial, but the record did not contain the bills of exception, the matters cannot be reviewed in the absence of these and a statement of facts, and the judgment below is affirmed.
    Appeal from the Criminal District Court of Tarrant. Tried below before the Honorable Geo. E. Hosey.
    Appeal from a conviction of forgery; penalty: two years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the case.
    No brief on file for appellant.
    
      Alvin M. Owsley, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
   DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of forgery and allotted two years in the penitentiary.

There are a number of questions presented in the amended motion for a new trial. These grounds of the motion refer to bills of exception which are mentioned as having been taken during the trial, but the record does not contain the bills of exception. Therefore, we are unable to revise the matters specified. Nor does the record contain a statement of the facts. So far as the matters "contained in the record are concerned, we find no reason why the judgment should be reversed, and in fact none of the grounds of the motion for new trial can be revised as the case presents itself.

The judgment, therefore, will be affirmed.

Affirmed.  