Love v. State

1. On the trial of one for the offense of assault with intent to murder, it was not erroneous to charge the jury as follows: “If you find that with malice, whether express or implied, and with the specific intention to kill, and with a weapon likely to produce death, the defendant inflicted the wounds upon the prosecuting witness, alleged in the bill of indictment (if there was nothing more in the ease), then he would be guilty of assault /ith intent to murder.” This instruction was not subject to the criticism that it excluded the defenses set up by the accused; especially as the trial…