Case Name: BENNETT v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1916-03-29
Citations: 185 S.W. 14
Docket Number: No. 4007
Parties: BENNETT v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 185
Pages: 14–15

Head Matter:
BENNETT v. STATE.
(No. 4007.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
March 29, 1916.
On Motion for Rehearing April 19, 1916.)
1. Indictment and Information <§=189(2)— Conviction ox Included Oxxense — Aggravated Assault — Simple Assault.
Under a charge of aggravated assault, based upon the allegation that the defendant was an adult male person, and the assault was upon a child, where the evidence failed to show he was an adult, it was not error to submit the issue of simple assault, since the charge could not be sustained in the absence of such showing.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Indictment and Information, Cent. Dig. §§ 585, 589; Dec. Dig. 0=189(2).]
2. Criminal Law <g=741(l) — Trial —Direction ox Verdict.
Where the evidence would support conviction, it is not error to refuse to direct a verdict of acquittal.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 1705, 1713, 1727, 1728; Dec. Dig. ®=741(1)J
3. Criminal Law 0=1038(1) — Appeal—Scope ox Review — Misdemeanors.
On appeal from conviction of a misdemeanor instructions which were not objected to cannot be reviewed.
[Ed. Note. — For other eases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2646; Dec. Dig. 0=1038(1).]
On Motion for Rehearing.
4. Criminal Law <§=1038(1) — Appeal—Preservation ox Exceptions.
Where the defendant, charged with aggravated assault, failed to object to the submission of the issue of simple assault, he cannot, after conviction, raise the question that he could have, been convicted only of aggravated assault.
TEd. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 2646; Dee. Dig. <§=1038(1).]
5. Indictment and Information <§=189(2)— Ag&ravated Assault — Included Oxxenses.
In every indictment or information charging aggravated assault, simple assault is necessarily included.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Indictment and Information, Cent. Dig. §§ 585, 589; Dec. Dig. <§=189(2).]
Appeal from Newton County uourt; W. E. Gray, Judge.
Eddie Bennett, being charged with making an aggravated assault, was convicted of simple assault, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Wightman & Hancock, of Newton, for appellant. O. C. McDonald, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
HARPER, J.
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 Yiola 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, cannot 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 assaylt. 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 cannot be sustained. Hartsell v. State, 55 Tex. Cr. R. 389, 116 S. W. 1159; Smith v. State, 51 Tex. Cr. R. 645, 104 S. W. 899; Robinson v. State, 25 Tex. App. 111, 7 S. W. 531; Andrews v. State, 13 Tex. App. 343; Davis v. State, 76 S. W. 466; Ellers v. State, 55 S. W. 813; Kemp v. State, 25 Tex. App. 589, 8 S. W. 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 Tex. Cr. R. 329, 119 S. W. 861.
The judgment is affirmed.
c§=For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes