Hinds v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Hinds v. State

55 S.W.2d 1041, 122 Tex. Crim. 436, 1932 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 764

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedNovember 16, 1932

DocketNo. 15396.

StatusPublished

This text of 55 S.W.2d 1041 (Hinds v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

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

Pincite

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 S.W.2d 1041, 122 Tex. Crim. 436, 1932 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 764, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hinds-v-state-texcrimapp-1932.