ARK.] MCGONAGILL V. STATE. 283 MCGONAGILL V. STATE. Crim. 3941 Opinion delivered September 23, 1935. • 1. CRIMINAL LAW—NECESSITY OF RILL OF FIXCEPTIONS.—In a felony case a "synopsis of the evidence" approved by the prosecuting attorney to be used in lieu of a bill of exceptions, not approved by the trial judge nor filed with the clerk, could not be considered on appeal. 2. CRIMINAL LAW—MATTERS CONSIDERED ON APPEAL.—Where the trial judge had not signed a purported bill of exceptions, the Supreme CoVrt's review on appeal is limited to errors apparent on the face of the record. Appeal from Crittenden Circuit Court; Neil Kil-lough, judge ; affirmed. W. B. Scott, for appellant. Carl E. Bailey, Attorney .General, and Guy E. Wil-liams, Assistant, for appellee. BUTLER, J. The appellant was indicted by the grand jury for the crime of murder in the .first, degree for the killing of Hershel Taylor. At the . trial be was convicted of murder in the second, degree, and his punishment was fixed at imprisonment in the State pellitentiary for a term of ten years. From the verdict and judgment thereon this appeal is prosecuted. It is here argued by the appellant that the evidence adduced at the trial was not legally sufficient to support the verdict, and that be was prejudiced by the remarks
284 [191 of the prosecuting attorney during the course of his argument Appellant has prepared and incorporated in the transcript what purports to be "synopsis•of the evidence in the above-styled' cause to be used in lieu' •of billof exceptions, it being too late for the court reporter to prepare -bill of ' exceptidns." It . is -Stated in appellant's brief that-the synopsis of the evidence -preparetl was' approved . by the: prosecuting attorney.' In the case' of Atistin . V. State; 183' Ark. 481, 36 S. W. (2d) 400, a similar record was pre§ented to this court which said (referring to the record) : "This cannot be considered upon appeal for two reasons: In the first place, it was not filed with the clerk within the time allowed by the conrt for filing a bill • of exceptions. In the second place, it is stillnecessary that the trial judge sign the bill of exceptions in a felony case before it can be admitteclas . a part-of th&record upon appeal. Ward v. State,.135 Ark. 259, 204 S. W.. 971. The trial, judge did not sign what purports to be . the bill of exceptions, and . our reviewjs limited to errors apparent on the face of the reeord:' 'Ilere there Was no bill of . exCePtion presented to thp . judge or filed with the clerk:, We have examined Ifie indictment and find it and the ,judgment. and sentence. to be in proper form.. The judgment must therefore be affirmed:
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.