Hinds v. State

55 S.W.2d 1041, 122 Tex. Crim. 436, 1932 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 764
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Hinds v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 115 Tex. Crim. 180
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided November 16, 1932·No. No. 15396.·Published

Opinions

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for assault with intent to murder; punishment, two years in the penitentiary.

The facts in this case are sufficient to justify the jury’s, conclusion that appellant cut Marton Rusk, inflicting a wound across his stomach some eight inches in length, going through. *437 the walls of the stomach. There appears to have been no evidence introduced on behalf of appellant. The only bill of exception found in the record complains of the introduction of a knife before,the jury. The bill is qualified at length by the trial judge. The facts in testimony, as well as those recited in the qualification of the court, make apparent the fact that no error was committed in the introduction of the knife in evidence. There are no exceptions to the charge of the court, and no other complaints of procedure.

The judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hinds v. State, 55 S.W.2d 1041, 122 Tex. Crim. 436, 1932 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 764 (Tex. 1932).

55 S.W.2d 1041 (Hinds v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.