Court Opinion

ID: 9668567
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 02:18:16.801966+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:51:10.067578
License: Public Domain

WOODLEY, Presiding Judge
(dissenting)
*606The testimony of Dr. Cullen was clearly admissible. Root v. State, 169 Tex. Cr. Rep. 382, 334 S.W. 2d 154; Boyle v. State, 158 Tex. Cr. R. 468, 256 S.W. 2d 574; 6 Tex. Jur. 2d 318, Sec. 87.
Whether the victim of the assault was a pedestrian or an occupant of a vehicle would not alter the rule that evidence as to the nature and extent of the injuries inflicted on the assaulted person is admissible regardless of the nature of the charge of aggravated assault contained in the indictment.
Where the state relies upon negligence, the extent of the injuries is admissible under the above rule and also as tending to shed light on the force of the collision, the speed of the automobile the accused was driving, and the manner of its operation.