
    HAMILTON v. STATE.
    (No. 4280.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Nov. 8, 1916.)
    1. Criminal Law <&wkey;1099(6) — Appeal and Error — Statement of Facts.
    In a prosecution for violation of the local option law, a statement of facts, filed more than 20 days after adjournment of the court, is too late for consideration by the Court of Criminal Appeals.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2877; Dec. Dig. <&wkey;>1099(6).]
    2. Criminal Law <&wkey;1122(3) — Appeal and Error — Exceptions.
    In the absence of the evidence, the Court of Criminal Appeals is unable intelligently to pass upon exceptions taken to the charges of the court.
    [Ed. Note. — For other eases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2941; Dec. Dig. &wkey;>1122(3).]
    Appeal from Newton County Court; W. E. Gray, Judge.
    Reese Hamilton, Jr., was convicted of violating the local option law, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Forse & Ferguson, of Newton, for appellant. O. C. McDonald, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   DAVIDSON, J.

Appellant was convicted of violating the local option law; his punishment being assessed at a fine of 825 and 20 daysJ imprisonment in the county jail.

Court adjourned on 22d of July; the statement of facts was filed on August 14th. This was more than 20 days after the adjournment of court, which makes it too late for consideration. There were exceptions taken to the court’s charge, as well as exceptions to other rulings of the court in admitting testimony. In the absence of the evidence this court is unable intelligently to revise the charges of the court. The charge may have been in accord with the facts and properly submitted the questions. There seem to have been no special charges asked, and this is a misdemeanor.

The judgment will be affirmed. 
      tfte>E'or other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     