Mansfield v. State
Citation | 63 S.W. 630 |
Parties | MANSFIELD v. STATE. |
Decision Date | 05 June 1901 |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from Medina county court; H. E. Haass, Judge.
T. J. Mansfield was convicted of making an aggravated assault, and he appeals. Reversed.
V. H. Blocker and Ed De Montel, for appellant. Robt. A. John, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Appellant was convicted of an aggravated assault, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $25. The information charges defendant with an aggravated assault,—that by cutting with a knife he inflicted serious bodily injury upon Fritz J. Leinweber. The court's charge authorized the jury to convict (1) if serious bodily injury was inflicted; (2) if the assault was made with deadly weapons under circumstances not amounting to an intent to murder or maim; (3) if committed with premeditated design, and by the use of means calculated to inflict great bodily injury; (4) if defendant used more force in resisting an assault made upon him than was necessary. These matters were promptly and properly excepted to during the trial, were presented to the trial court on motion for new trial, and are here assigned as error. It has been always held to be erroneous for the court to submit as a basis for conviction a ground of aggravation not set out in the information or indictment. For authorities, see White's Ann. Pen. Code, § 1023; Herald v. State, 37 Tex. Cr. App. 409, 35 S. W. 670; Jones v. State, 62 S. W. 758, 2 Tex. Ct. Rep. 485. The ground of aggravation set out in the information was the infliction of serious bodily injury by cutting with a knife. The state must base the conviction alone upon this charge. The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Mississippi Cent. R. Co. v. Smith
......Co. v. Ferebee, 238 U.S. 269, 59 L.Ed. 1030; Railway Co. v. Moquin, 283 U.S. 520, 75 L.Ed. 1243; L. & N. R. R. Co. v. State, 65. So. 881; Bales v. Strickland, 139 Miss. 636, 103 So. 432; Brewer v. Browning, 115 Miss. 358, 76 So. 267;. Haines v. Haines, 98 Miss. ......
-
Mississippi Cent. R. Co. v. Aultman
...... . . Green. v. Weller, 32 Miss. 650; Koch v. Bridges, 45 Miss. 247; Yerger v. State, 91 Miss. 802, 45 So. 849;. Hamner v. Yazoo Delta Lbr. Co., 100 Miss. 349, 56. So. 466; State v. Traylor, 100 Miss. 544, 56 So. 521; ......
-
Padfield v. McIntosh, 15501
......3967 styled Dean Padfield v. Vada McIntosh, in the State of Colorado, County of Chaffee, ordering the respondent to pay the sum of $100.00 each month for the support and maintenance of the minor child, * * ......
-
Starr County v. Laughlin, 12973
...... conviction in a contempt proceeding in the trial court in a civil case is an original proceeding by habeas corpus in the Supreme Court of this State. In Tims v. Tims, Tex.Civ.App., 204 S.W.2d 995, the Court said:. 'It has been the will settled law of this State since the decision by the Supreme ......