Case Name: Eugene Hoyle v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1911-04-05
Citations: 62 Tex. Crim. 297
Docket Number: No. 1103
Parties: Eugene Hoyle v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 62
Pages: 297–299

Head Matter:
Eugene Hoyle v. The State.
No. 1103.
Decided April 5, 1911.
Rehearing Denied May 10, 1911.
1. —Aggravated Assault—Recognizance—Reinstatement.
Where appellant’s recognizance did not show that he had heen convicted of any offense in the court below, the appeal must be dismissed; however, appellant having filed a proper recognizance, the case may be heard on its merits.
2. —Same—Charge of Court—Requested Charges—Practice on Appeal.
In trials of misdemeanors it is necessary in the event the court’s charge is objected to, to except thereto and request and present a special instruction, and if this is not done the charge of the court below can not be reviewed on appeal.
3.—Same—Sufficiency of the Evidence.
Where the evidence sustained a conviction for an aggravated assault, there was no error.
Appeal from the County Court of Sabine. Tried below before the Hon. J. H. McGown.
Appeal from a conviction of aggravated assault; penalty, a fine of $25.
The opinion states the case.
Goodrich & Lewis, for appellant.
G. B. Lane, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

Opinion:
HARPER, Judge.
The appellant in this case was charged with the offense of making an aggravated assault on Lula Canton. Upon a trial he was convicted and his punishment assessed at a fine of $25, from which judgment he appeals.
The Assistant Attorney-General moves to dismiss this appeal on account of the insufficiency of the recognizance. The recognizance does not show that defendant had been convicted of any offense, and not being within the terms of the statute, the motion is sustained.
The appeal is dismissed.
Dismissed.