Court Opinion

ID: 9676069
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 05:13:57.59632+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:43.491171
License: Public Domain

ON APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR REHEARING.
BEAUCHAMP, Judge.
Appellant’s motion for rehearing, ably presented by oral argument, insists that the evidence in the case does not support a finding of intent to commit the murder.
We said in Ammann v. State, 145 Tex. Cr. R. 34, 165 S.W. 2d 744: “Such intent may be inferred when the instrument used in committing the assault is a deadly weapon. If the weapon used is not deadly, the intent to kill on the part of the accused may be ascertained from and shown by the surrounding facts and circumstances.”
In view of the evidence of the doctor, who testified as to the location of the wound under the pit of the arm, in the vicinity of the heart, and the extent of the wound thus inflicted and the likelihood of it causing death within ten minutes if bleeding was not stopped, we think the question of intent was raised and that the jury is supported in its finding.
Other matters discussed in the motion need not be treated further. Appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.