
    CASTLE v. STATE.
    (No. 8910.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    April 22, 1925.
    Rehearing Granted June 17, 1925.)
    On Motion for Rehearing.
    Criminal law ¡®=»1092(I4), 1099 (,11) — Conviction reversed, where appellant unable, through no fault, to get record authenticated.
    Conviction of false swearing was reversed and cause remanded, where bills of exception and statement of facts were unverified, and it was made to appear that lack of verification was not due to fault or laches of appellant but was due to absence of regular judge and want 'of authority of special judge to sign statements of facts or approve bills of exception.
    Appeal from Criminal District Court, Dallas County; Felix D. Robertson, Judge.
    A. C. Castle was convicted of false swearing, and he appeals.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Roger Lewis, of Dallas, for appellant.
    Shelby S. Cox, Cr. Dist. Atty., of Dallas, Tom Garrard, State’s Atty., and Grover C. Morris, Asst. State’s Atty., both of Austin, for the State.
   MORROW, P. J.

The offense is false swearing; punishment fixed at confinement in tile penitentiary for a period of three years.

We have no brief for the appellant. The indictment appears regular. A number of purported bills of exception are copied in the record. None of them, however, are certified, nor is the purported statement of facts signed by either counsel or the judge trying the case.

The facts heard not being before us, nor the rulings of the court authenticated so' that they can be considered, the judgment is affirmed.

On Motion for Rehearing.

Erom the verified and undenied averments in the appellant’s motion for rehearing, it is made to appear that on February 25, 1924, Hon. Grover Adams, because of the absence of the district judge, was elected special judge by the Bar; that he qualified and served in that capacity 'until the 23d day of August, 1924, during all of which time the regularly elected judge of said court was absent. Appellant's motion for new trial was overruled on March 24th, and 60 days were allowed within which to prepare and file bills of exception and statement of facts. An additional allowance of time was made on May 21st and again on June 12th, the total extension amounting to about 88 days. These facts are verified by the affidavit of the deputy district clerk as well as by the appellant’s counsel. From the affidavit of Hon. Grover Adams, his election and service as special district judge are verified; also, that the appellant, through his counsel, presented to the said Grover Adams his bills of exception and statement of facts pertaining to the trial.of the appellant, and that the approval of them was refused for the reason that the appellant’s case had been tried by the regular judge.. It appears from the record that the bills of exception and statement of facts were prepared within a short time after the motion for new trial was overruled, and that numerous efforts were made to present them to the regular district judge for authentication, but that owing to the absence' of the judge these efforts were unsuccessful. The special judge was not authorized by law to sign the statement of facts or approve the bills of exception. The absence of these matters seems not due to any fault or laches upon the part of the appellant. Unless relief is afforded ip this court, the appellant has been practically deprived of the right of appeal accorded him by law. This' court cannot pass upon unauthenticated statement of facts and bills of exception, but can only give relief by reversing the judgment because, without fault of the appellant, his rights have been denied him. The precedents upon the subject are numerous. See Shaffer v. State, 58 Tex. Cr. R. 647, 127 S. W. 206; Vernon’s Tex. Crim. Stat. 1916, vol. 2, p. 811, note 2.

The motion for rehearing is granted, the affirmance set aside, the judgment of the trial court reversed, and the cause remanded.  