Case Name: ROYSTON v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1917-05-23
Citations: 196 S.W. 542
Docket Number: No. 4491
Parties: ROYSTON v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 196
Pages: 542–542

Head Matter:
ROYSTON v. STATE.
(No. 4491.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
May 23, 1917.
On Motion for Rehearing, June 20, 1917.)
Assault and Battery &wkey;>92 — Aggravated Assault — Seriousness — Sufficiency on Evidence.
In prosecution for aggravated assault, evidence held insufficient to show the character of seriousness required to render the assault an aggravated assault.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Assault and Battery, Cent. Dig. §§ 137-139.]
Prendergast, J., dissenting.
Appeal from Bexar County Court; Nelson Lytle, Judge.
Jesse Royston was convicted of an aggravated assault, and he appeals.
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.
A. L. Hatchett and L. W. Greenly, both of San Antonio, for appellant. E. B. Hendricks, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
DAVIDSON, P. J.
Appellant was convicted of aggravated assault by the judge who tried the case, a jury having been waived. His punishment was assessed at a fine of $25, and 60 days' imprisonment in the county jail.
The complaint and information contain two counts, one charging the assault to have been committed with a rock, which was a deadly weapon; the other that the assault was aggravated by reason of the fact it produced serious bodily injury. There is nothing to indicate that the rock was a deadly weapon, except the fact that defendant, under the state's view, knocked the assaulted party down twice, hitting him in the back of the head the first time, and upon his getting up defendant struck him again, and at this time he had a rock in his hand. The inference may be deduced that both blows were inflicted by the rock. The only evidence in regard to the seriousness of the wound was the testimony of the assaulted party wherein he states that he was laid up. or suffered from the wound for a couple of weeks. This is rather meager testimony to show that the assault was of a serious nature, but it may have been sufficient under the circumstances to have justified the court reaching the conclusion that the serious bodily injury was inflicted. Taking this view of the matter, the judgment will be affirmed.
<&wkey;For other oases see same topic ana KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes