Case Name: JONES v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1921-04-27
Citations: 231 S.W. 122
Docket Number: No. 6221
Parties: JONES v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 231
Pages: 122–124

Head Matter:
JONES v. STATE.
(No. 6221.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
April 27, 1921.
Rehearing Granted May 19, 1921.)
1. Criminal law <@=31081 — Notice of appeal essential to jurisdiction.
Without notice of appeal, the Court of Criminal Appeals has no jurisdiction under provision of Yernon’s Ann. Code Cr. Proc. 1916, art. 915.
On Motion for Rehearing.
2. Criminal law <⅜=>195(2) — Where defendant fires at one and wounds another, state may charge assault on both or either, but judgment in one case bars prosecution in other.
Where defendant fired at one person and wounded another, it was within the discretion of the state to charge an assault on both or either of them; but conviction or acquittal in one case would bar prosecution in the other.
3. Homicide <@=89 (2) — Fact shot fired at one with intent to murder him wounded another no excuse.
Where defendant fired a shot at one person, with malice, intending to kill him, the fact that it wounded another, whom he did not intend to kill, would not excuse him from liability for assault with intent to murder.
4. Assault and battery <@=375 — Indictment for assault with intent to commit another offense need not give elements of offense intended to be committed.
Under Const, art. 1, § 10, guaranteeing accused the right to demand the nature and cause of the accusation, in charging an assault with intent to commit another offense, it is necessary only to allege such matters as bring the offense within the definition of an assault coupled with an intention to commit such other offense, naming it, without giving the constituent elements of the offense intended to be committed.
5. Indictment and information 174 — Principal offender may be convicted under indictment charging him directly with offense.
A principal offender, by reason of the part performed by him in the commission of an offense, may be convicted under an indictment charging him directly with its commission.
6. Indictment and information <@=3125(44) — Indictment may charge muraer of two or more by same act in single count.
An indictment for murder may, in a single count, charge the murder of two or more persons by the same act.
7. Homicide 142(10) — Under charge of assault to murder one, proof of intent to murder another is admissible.
Under an indictment charging an assault upon M. with the intent to murder him, the state could prove that the shot which, wounded him was fired at E. with intent to murder E.; the fact that M. was the victim rendering it no less an assault with intent to murder.
8. Homicide <@=319 — No error in overruling motion for new triad, where testimony of absent witness is contradictory.
It was not error to overrule a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, where the testimony of an absent witness as to an uncommunicated threat against defendant, made by one at whom he shot with intent to murder, was so contradictory that the court was justified in disregarding it.
9. Homicide <@=3319 — New trial for newly discovered evidence properly denied, where defendant knew of same before trial.
It was not error to overrule a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, where an absent witness would have testified to threats against defendant by one at whom he shot with intent to murder, which were communicated to defendant; defendant having known of them before the trial.
Appeal from District Court, Marion County; J. A. Ward, Judge.
Mike Jones was convicted of assault with intent to murder, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
T. D. Rowell, of Jefferson, for appellant.
R. H. Hamilton,' Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
MORROW, P. J.
The conviction is for assault with intent to murder; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of 10 years.
We find it necessary to sustain the motion made by the state to dismiss the appeal because of the absence of any notice of appeal. Without notice of appeal, this court has no jurisdiction. Article 915, Vernon's Texas Criminal Statutes, vol. 2, p. 877, and cases there listed.
<a=Eor other cases see same topic and KBY-NTJMBBR in ail Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes