State v. Matassa

Supreme Court of Louisiana February 21, 1916

State v. Matassa, 138 La. 1079 (La. 1916)

71 So. 190

Sommerville

Opinion of the Court

SOMMERVILLE, J.

[1] The record contains no bill of exceptions or assignment of errors on the face of the record.

[2] There is a motion for a new trial found in the record, which is unsworn to, and which was overruled; and the minutes recite that:

“Counsel for defendant excepts and reserves a bill.”

But no bill of exceptions was filed.

“A notation by the clerk of court in a criminal case that the defendant excepted and reserved a bill cannot be considered a ‘bill of exceptions.’ ” State v. Latino, 138 La. 14, 69 South. 857; State v. Miller, 138 La. 373, 70 South. 330, and authorities therein cited.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: STATE v. MATASSA
Status: Published
Syllabus: (Syllabus by the Court.) 1. Criminal Law When the transcript of appeal in a criminal case does not contain a bill of exceptions or assignment of errors, the judgment will be affirmed. [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2776, 28S6; Dec. Dig. &wkey;> 1104(3).] 2. Criminal Law “A notation by the clerk of court in a criminal case that the defendant excepted and reserved a bill cannot be considered a ‘bill of exceptions.’ ” [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2803, 2828-2830; Dec. Dig. &wkey;1091(l).]