Opinion
No. 14076.
Delivered February 4, 1931.
1. — Intoxicating Liquor — Continuance.
Where application for continuance was overruled the record should show that exception was reserved in order to have the action of the trial court reviewed.
2. — Intoxicating Liquor — Procedure — Sentence.
Where the judgment and sentence disregards the Indeterminate Sentence statute, they will be reformed so as to accord with the provisions of that law.
Appeal from the District Court of Callahan County. Tried below before the Hon. M. S. Long, Judge.
Appeal from a conviction for possessing a still for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor; penalty, confinement in the penitentiary for one year.
Reformed and affirmed.
The opinion states the case.
M. E. Lawrence, of Eastland, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Attorney, of Austin, for the State.
Conviction is for the possession of a still for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor, punishment being confinement in the penitentiary for one year.
The record is before this court without a statement of facts.
An application for continuance was overruled but if exception was reserved to the action of the court it is not brought forward by bill of exception.
We observe that appellant is adjudged to be guilty of the offense of "possession of a still". The sentence is similarly worded. There is no such offense as the mere possession of a still. Appellant was indicted and tried for the possession of a still for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor. The judgment and sentence will be reformed to conform to the indictment and the charge of the court, and appellant is adjudged guilty of the possession of a still for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor.
As thus reformed, the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.