Millard v. State

• Decision Date: 17 October 1900
• Parties: MILLARD v. STATE.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL>
• Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

59 S.W. 273

MILLARD v. STATE.¹

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

October 17, 1900.

Appeal from Nacogdoches county court; V. E. Middlebrook, Judge.

Niece Millard was convicted of an aggravated assault, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Dial & Chesnutt, for appellant. Robt. A. John, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

DAVIDSON, P. J.

Appellant was convicted of an aggravated assault, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $25. Appellant complains that the following portion of the court's charge is upon the weight of the evidence: "You are instructed if any male adult should use any unlawful violence upon the person of a female with intent to injure her, whatever be the means or degree of violence, he is deemed guilty, under the law, of an aggravated assault and battery." We think the charge presents a correct proposition of law, and is not subject to the criticism urged by appellant.

Other objections and questions raised cannot be considered in the absence of the statement of facts. Appellant, however, insists the verdict of the jury is erroneous. The verdict is as follows: "We, the jury, find defendant, Niece Millard, guilty as charged in the information, and assess his punishment at a fine of $25." The court only submitted the issue of aggravated assault. This being true, it was not necessary for the verdict of the jury to show of what degree of assault appellant was found guilty. This exact question was passed upon by us in Styles v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 40 S. W. 498. No error appearing in the record, the judgment is affirmed.

1. Rehearing denied November 21, 1900.