Nicholson v. State

DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was charged with wantonly killing a mule, with the intent to injure the owner. The case is one of circumstantial evidence, but fails to exclude any reasonable hypothesis except the guilt of the defendant. In fact, the evidence does not show with anything like legal accuracy or sufficiency that appellant shot the mule. He was in the neighborhood, and under his own statement about one hundred and fifty yards from where some shooting was heard, which is supposed to have brought about the death of the mule; though the mule was found some four hundred yards…