Case Name: Smith Thomas v. State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1913-01-08
Citations: 69 Tex. Crim. 649
Docket Number: No. 2178
Parties: Smith Thomas v. State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 69
Pages: 649–653

Head Matter:
Smith Thomas v. State.
No. 2178.
Decided January 8, 1913.
Rehearing denied March 26, 1913.
1. —Assault to Murder—Statement of Facts—Behearing.
Where the case was affirmed in the absence of a statement of facts, but it was shown on motion for rehearing that the clerk had inadvertently omitted the same from the record, the case will be heard on its merits.
2. —Same—Reasonable Doubt—Charge of Court.
Where, upon trial of assault to murder, the evidence developed two theories, one, that of the State, that the defendant made the assault with intent to kill, and that of the defense, of perfect self-defense, and the court properly^ charged on the burden of proof, reasonable doubt and the presumption of innocence, there was no error in the court’s refusal of defendant’s requested charge that there must be a concurrence of the twelve minds of the jurors, etc., with reference to reasonable doubt.
3. —Same—Charge of Court—Self-Defense.
Where, upon trial of assault to murder, the court submitted defendant’s theory of self-defense in a proper charge, there was no error.
4. —Same—Charge of Court—Manslaughter—Aggravated Assault.
Where, upon trial af assault to murder, the issue of manslaughter did not arise from the evidence, there was no error in the court’s failure to charge on aggravated assault.
6.—Same—Rule Stated—Aggravated Assault.
If a case is either assault to murder or perfect self-defense, it is not error to fail to charge on aggravated assault. Following Johnson v. State, 47 Texas Crim. Rep., 300, and other cases.
6. —Same—Rule Stated—Aggravated Assault.
If the case is either assault to murder or that defendant is guilty of no offense, it is not error to fail to charge on aggravated assault. Following Bramlette v. State, 21 Texas Crim. App., 611, and other eases.
7. —Same—Manslaughter—Rule Stated—Adequate Cause.
If, had death resulted, the issue of manslaughter would not be in the case, it is not error to fail to charge on aggravated assault on the theory of sudden passion aroused by inadequate cause. Following Anderson v. State, 15 Texas Crim. App., 447, and other cases.
Appeal from the Criminal District Court of Harris. Tried below before the Hon. C. W. Robinson.
Appeal from a conviction of assault with intent to murder; penalty, three years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
The opinion states the case.
J. M. Gibson and W. W. Wander, for appellant.
On question of statement of facts being left out by inadvertence of clerk: Shaffer v. State, 58 Texas Crim. Rep., 646, 127 S. W. Rep., 206.
On question of court’s failure to charge on aggravated assault: Stevens v. State, 38 Texas Crim. Rep., 550; Canister v. State, 46 id., 221; Cooper v. State, 49 id., 28; Goode v. State, 32 id., 505; Slaughter v. State, 34 id., 81.
C. E. Lane, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

Opinion:
PRENDERGAST, Judge.
Appellant was indicted for an assault with intent to murder, convicted and his penalty fixed at three years in the penitentiary.
There is no statement of facts in the record. In the absence of a statement of facts none of -the questions attempted to be raised by appellant can be passed upon by this court. Therefore, the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.