Case Name: Eddie Bennett v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1916-03-29
Citations: 79 Tex. Crim. 380
Docket Number: No. 4007
Parties: Eddie Bennett v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 79
Pages: 380–382

Head Matter:
Eddie Bennett v. The State.
No. 4007.
Decided March 29, 1916.
Rehearing denied April 19, 1916.
1. —Aggravated Assault — Simple Assault.
Where the information alleged that defendant was an adult male and committed an assault on a child, yet the evidence did not show that he was an adult male, he could not be convicted of aggravated assault, but could nevertheless be convicted of simple assault and there was no error in refusing a peremptory charge to acquit.
©
2. —Same—Misdemeanor—Practice on Appeal.
This being a misdemeanor^ 4here are no other questions presented in the motion for a new trial which can be considered by this court, and the judgment must be affirmed. Following Basques v. State, 56 Texas Criml Rep., 329,
3. —Same—Adult Male — Aggravated Assault — Simple Assault.
Where defendant was charged as an adult male assaulting a child, and the evidence only showed that he was an adult, he could not be convicted of an aggravated assault, but there was no error of convicting him of simple assault which was necessarily included. Following Baker v. State, 4 Texas Crim. App., 223, and other cases.
4. —Same—Rule Stated — Grade of Offense.
Where there is evidence of a higher grade of offense a conviction will not be disturbed for the inferior degree, although there was no testimony showing the inferior degree. Following Pickett v. State, 63 S. W. Rep., 325, and other cases.
Appeal from the County Court of Newton. Tried below before the Hon. W. B. Gray.
Appeal from a conviction of simple assault; penalty, a fine of $25.
The opinion states the case.
Wightman & Hancock, for appellant.
Cited Brown v. State, 66 SI W. Rep., 548; Doolan v. State, 14 Texas Crim. App, 61; Davis v. State, 42 S. W. Rep., 290.
C. C. McDonald, Assistant Attorney General, for the State. — On question of adult male: Schenault v. State, 10 Texas Crim. App., 410;
George v. State, 11 id., 95; Hall v. State, 16 id., 6.

Opinion:
HARPER, Judge.
The complaint charged appellant with making an aggravated assault on Viola Scott, alleging, that appellant was an adult male and the said Viola Scott a child.
The facts show that appellant is a teacher, and that he severely whipped Viola Scott, she being one of his scholars.
The contention is made that the court erred in submitting simple assault, and that the verdict of the jury finding him guilty of simple assault can not be sustained, in that appellant is an adult male person, and the law makes an assault by a male person on a child an aggravated assault. While the information alleges appellant to be an adult, yet there is no evidence in the record that he is an adult, and it has been frequently held by this court, that where the evidence fails to show that the accused is an adult, a judgment of conviction for aggravated assault can not be sustained. Hartsell v. State, 55 Texas Crim. Rep., 389; Smith v. State, 51 Texas Crim. Rep., 645; Bobinson v. State, 25 Texas Crim. App., Ill; Andrews v. State, 13 Texas Crim. App., 343; Davis v. State, 76 S. W. Rep., 466; Ellers v. State, 55 S. W. Rep., 813; Kemp v. State, 8 S. W. Rep., 804. So, instead of the evidence not authorizing the verdict of the jury, if the jury had found appellant guilty of aggravated assault, it could not have been sustained, as there is no evidence in the record to show that he is an adult.
The only bill of exceptions in the record complains that the court erred in not. giving the special charge instructing the jury to return a verdict of not guilty. The evidence, while conflicting, from the State's standpoint, amply supports the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing to instruct a verdict of acquittal.
This being a misdemeanor, there are no other questions presented in the motion for a new trial we can consider. Basquez v. State, 56 Texas Crim. Rep., 329.
The judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.