
    MARUE v. STATE.
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Feb. 15, 1911.)
    Chimin al Law (§ 1094) — Appeal—Recobd.
    In the absence of bill of exceptions and statement of facts, the only ground for new trial being that the verdict was contrary to the law and evidence, the indictment for robbery with a deadly weapon being regular, two counts thereof having been submitted to the jury by appropriate and correct charge, the jury having found him guilty and assessed his punishment at 40 years in the penitentiary, and the judgment being regular, there must be an affirmance.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2807, 3204; Dee. Dig. § 1094.]
    Appeal from Criminal District Court, Dallas County; Robt. B. Seay, Judge.
    Earl Marue appeals from a conviction. ’
    Affirmed.
    C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., .for the State.
    
      
      For other oases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Rep’r Indexes
    
   PRENDERGAST, J.

The appellant was •indicted for robbery with a deadly weapon.

There is no statement of the facts or bills of exception. The only ground of the motion for new trial was that the verdict and judgment are contrary to the law and the evidence. The indictment is regular, charging robbery with a deadly weapon in three counts, two of which were submitted to the jury by an appropriate and correct charge of the court. The jury found the defendant guilty, and assessed his punishment at confinement in the penitentiary for 40 years, and the judgment of the court is regular.

We therefore affirm the judgment.  