Oelfke v. State

The appellant was convicted of embezzlement. After a motion for a new trial was overruled and judgment rendered upon the verdict, appellant appealed and the only error assigned is the overruling of appellant’s motion for a new trial.

The motion for a new trial is not set out in appellant’s brief nor the substance of it stated therein.

Appellant’s brief, under the heading of “Points and Authorities,” does not contain separately numbered propositions or points stated concisely and with-out argument, under separate headings as required by Rule 22, clause 5, of the Supreme Court. The appellant…