King v. State, 18617.
| Decision Date | 23 December 1936 |
| Docket Number | No. 18617.,18617. |
| Citation | 99 S.W.2d 932 |
| Parties | KING v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from Harrison County Court; B. R. Lindsay, Judge.
Dan L. King was convicted of aggravated assault, and he appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
Lane & Lane, of Marshall, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
Appellant was convicted of aggravated assault, and his punishment was assessed at confinement in the county jail for a term of six months and a fine of $50.
The complaint and information upon which appellant was tried contained two counts, in one of which he was charged with having committed an aggravated assault upon Felix N. Jones, a constable of precinct No. 4 in and for Harrison county, Tex., who was then and there in the lawful discharge of his official duty as an officer, which fact was then and there well known to the said Dan L. King. In the second count it was charged that appellant made an aggravated assault upon the person of Felix N. Jones with a deadly weapon, to wit, a rifle. If the testimony adduced by the State supports either, then the verdict of the jury and the judgment based thereon should be affirmed. But a careful study of the record leads us to the conclusion that the testimony does not justify appellant's conviction on either of the charges contained in the information.
Felix N. Jones, the alleged assaulted party, testified that he was constable of precinct No. 4 of Harrison county, Tex., which was well known to the appellant; that on the day of the alleged offense he went to the home of appellant and that of his father, mother, and brothers looking for a stolen pig; that while at their home he observed a certain pig in a pen and inquired of appellant's father, who had brought and put that pig in the pen; that the father informed him that his son, Jessie King, had put the pig in the pen; that soon thereafter appellant, his brothers Jessie and Joe King, accompanied by their sisters, came home in an automobile. Jones, the constable, approached Jessie at the car, questioned him with reference to the pig, arrested him, placed handcuffs on him, and told him that he was going to take him to jail; that, after being handcuffed, Jessie ran into the house, and the constable with drawn pistol followed him; that, when he reached the porch of the house, defendant, a brother of Jessie who was in the house, secured a Winchester, drew it on the constable, and forbade him to enter. The uncontradicted testimony shows that the constable had no warrant of arrest for Jessie, and it is obvious from the record that the offense of theft of a pig was not committed, if committed at all, within the presence or within the view of the constable; nor is it shown that he had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Holeman
...in what he believed was an unlawful arrest. See, e.g., People v. Gallo, 206 Misc. 935, 135 N.Y.S.2d 845 (1954); King v. State, 131 Tex.Crim. 442, 99 S.W.2d 932 (1936). However, the recent trend has been to prohibit people from interfering with an arrest that is being made by police officers......
-
State v. Holeman
...135 N.Y.S.2d 845, 206 Misc. 935 (1954) (brother); King v. State, 132 Tex.Cr.R. 200, 103 S.W.2d 754 (1937) (brother); King v. State, 131 Tex.Cr.R. 442, 99 S.W.2d 932 (1936) State v. Westlund, 13 Wash.App. 460, 536 P.2d 20 (1975), relied upon by the majority, is inapposite. In that case, unre......
-
Rodriguez v. State
...43; Satterwhite v. State, 112 Tex.Cr.R. 574, 17 S.W.2d 823; Williams v. State, 64 Tex.Cr.R. 491, 142 S.W. 899; King v. State, 131 Tex.Cr.R. 442, 443, 99 S.W.2d 932, and Miers v. State, 34 Tex.Cr.R. 161, 29 S.W. 1074, 1075, 53 Am.St.Rep. 705. In the latter case, Presiding Judge Hurt, speakin......