Kinnard v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
This appeal is from a conviction for aggravated assault, the punishment assessed being a fine of $25. Omitting formal averments, the information alleged, that accused “did then and there, in and upon Owen Plummer, commit an aggravated assault, and did then and there strike the said Owen Plummer with switches, the said A. W. Kennard then and there being an adult male, and the said Owen Plummer then and there being a child, contrary,” etc.
Read the full summary
This appeal is from a conviction for aggravated assault, the punishment assessed being a fine of $25. Omitting formal averments, the information alleged, that accused “did then and there, in and upon Owen Plummer, commit an aggravated assault, and did then and there strike the said Owen Plummer with switches, the said A. W. Kennard then and there being an adult male, and the said Owen Plummer then and there being a child, contrary,” etc. A motion was made to quash the information, because: (1) It charges no offense. (2) It charges an aggravated assault, but sets out acts showing an aggravated…
1Opinion of the Court
HENDERSON, Judge.
The appellant was convicted of an aggravated assault, and his punishment assessed at a fine of 825, and from the judgment of the lower court he prosecutes this appeal. There is nothing in appellant’s motion to quash the information, and the court did not err in overruling same. The information, in proper terms, charged an aggravated assault, the alleged aggravation consisting in an assault by an adult male uj>on a child; and the allegation that it was committed with switches is a charge of the means used, and the only effect of this was to confine the state to the proof of…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Spannell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1918
- Harris v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1918
- Stephens v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1902
- Cabness v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1941