
    PORTER v. STATE.
    (No. 10892.)
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    May 11, 1927.
    Criminal law <©=1092(13) — Reviewing court cannot consider statement and bill of exceptions, where record fails to show why successor instead of trial judge signed them (Rev. St„ 1925, arts. 2248, 2288).
    The Court of Criminal Appeals cannot consider statement of facts and bill of exceptions in criminal case, approved long afterwards by the successor of the judge who tried the case, where record fails to disclose either the death of the trial judge, so as to warrant the approval under Rev. St. 1925, arts. 2248, 2288, or any reason .why he did not approve them.
    Commissioners’ Decision.
    Appeal from District Court, Rains County; J. M. Melson, Judge.
    A. L. Porter was convicted of unlawfully possessing mash, material, and supplies for the manufacture of spirituous, vinous, and malt liquors capable of producing intoxication, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Natt M. Crawford, of Grand Saline, and Wynne & Wynne, of Wills Point, fdr appellant.
    Sam D. Stinson, State’s Atty., and Robt. M. Lyles, Asst. State’s Atty., both of Austin, for the State.
   BETHEA, J.

The appellant was convicted for unlawfully possessing mash, material, and supplies for the manufacture of spirituous, vinous, and malt liquors capable of producing intoxication, and his punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

The case was tried before the Honorable J. M. Melson. There is in the record a statement of facts and one bill of exception, approved long afterwards by Grover Sellers, successor to the said J. M. Melson.

Under the statute, only the judge who tried a criminal case is authorized to approve the bill of exception and statement of fact, except where the trial judge dies before the time for said approval or filing, in which event .the bill of exception and statement of facts may be approved or filed by the deceased judge’s successor, as provided in article 2288, Revised Civil Statutes 1925. The record does not disclose the death of the trial judge J. M. Melson, nor is any reason shown why Judge Melson did not approve the bill of exception and the statement of facts.

With the record in this condition, we áre not authorized to consider the statement of facts and bill of exception. Without them, there is no question raised which can be reviewed. Porter v. State, 72 Tex. Cr. R. 71, 160 S. W. 1194; Richardson, v. State, 71 Tex. Cr. R. 111, 158 S. W. 517; Allen v. State, 72 Tex. Cr. R. 277, 162 S. W. 868; Kaufman v. State, 72 Tex. Cr. R. 455, 163 S. W. 74; Morgan v. State, 78 Tex. Cr. R. 222, 180 S. W. 610; article 2248, Revised Civil Statutes 1925.

The judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM. The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.

MORROW, P. J„ not sitting.  