# Brown v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · January 26, 1949 · 153 Tex. Crim. 22

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3921903

## Case

- **Full name:** R. B. Brown v. State.
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** January 26, 1949
- **Citations:** 153 Tex. Crim. 22; 216 S.W.2d 987; 1949 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1055
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Beauchamp
- **Judges:** Beauchamp
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3921903

## Opinion text

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.
The appeal is from a conviction for burglary, with a charge of repetition of offenses, and a sentence in the penitentiary for life.
The statement of facts in the case is not approved by the trial judge. It is not even agreed to by the state’s attorney or
*23
by the defense attorney. Consequently, it is not in position to be considered by this court.
A statement of facts on a motion for new trial appears in the record and, while it is signed by the trial judge, it is not a narrative statement as required by law. The judge has certified that it is necessary to have it in question and answer form. We have frequently held, and repeatedly in recent months, that the trial judge has no such power. The statute does give him the right to make such certificate regarding bills of exception. If the attorneys or the judge had taken the trouble to look at the plain provisions of the statute this would likely not have come to the court in its present shape. We are not authorized to consider it, under the statutory provision.
Bill of Exception No. 1 attempts to bring a complaint which we are unable to appraise in the absence of a statement of facts. Furthermore, the court’s qualification of the bill, which was accepted by appellant, removes any apparent error.
Bill of Exception No. 2, as qualified by the court, shows no error.
We are unable to consider the complaint in Bill of Exception No. 3 in the absence of statement of facts.
Bill of Exception No. 4, in several .respects, falls short of meeting the requirements of law in the preparation of bills of exception.
Bill of Exception No. 5 is in question and answer form and does not contain a certificate of the judge authorizing its consideration. In fact, said bill does not show to have been either approved or rejected by the court, if it could in other respects be considered a bill of exception. The same is true of each and every bill in the record.
Finding no reversible error, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3921903. Public record. Not legal advice.