THOMAS v. STATE

(103 So. 479) THOMAS v. STATE. (7 Div. 48.) (Court of Appeals of Alabama. March 24, 1925.) 1. Criminal law &wkey;>IO90(l4)— Refusal to give written charge not considered in absence of bill of exceptions. Refusal to give written charge as requested will not be considered in absence of bill of exceptions. 2. Criminal lav/ <§=1090(16) — Action in overruling motion for new trial not considered in absence of bill of exceptions. Action of trial court in overruling motion for new trial will not be considered in absence of bill of exceptions, under Gen. Acts 1915, p. 722. Appeal from Circuit Court, Etowah County; Woodson X Martin, Judge. John Thomas was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals. Affirmed. E. O. McCord & Son, of Gadsden, for appellant. Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for the State. [MAJORITY — RICE, J.] RICE, J. The appeal in this case is upon the record proper. There being no bill of exceptions, we cannot review the action of the trial court in refusing the written charges requested by the defendant. Eranklin v. State, 16 Ala. App. 192, 76 So. 476; Richey v. State, 16 Ala. App. 187, 76 So. 471; Mack v. State, 201 Ala. 269, 77 So. 683; Paitry v. State, 196 Ala. 598, 72 So. 36. Eor a like reason -w,e are unable to review the action of the court in overruling defendant’s motion for a new trial. Windom v. State, 18 Ala. App. 430, 93 So. 79; Thomas v. State, 18 Ala. App. 540, 93 So. 237; McCollum v. State, 18 Ala. App. 558, 93 So. 261; Pearce v. State, 18 Ala. App. 611, 93 So. 221; Stover v. State, 204 Ala. 311, 85 So. 393; Gen. Acts Ala. 1915, p. 722. We find no error on the record, and the judgment of conviction will be affirmed. Affirmed.