Legal Opinion

Winzel v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided November 16, 1904No. 2938PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Ho statement required.

1Opinion of the Court

DAVIDSOH, Presiding Judge.

Two questions are suggested for reversal; first, the indefiniteness of the verdict; and second, the error in the court’s charge. The allegation was that the aggravated assault was committed with a hoe handle inflicting serious bodily injury. The court charged the jury, if they so believed they would convict; and also charged them to convict if they believed the assault was committed with premeditated design. There was no authority under the pleading for the submission of the second proposition. This, of course, was error. Grayson v. State, 42 S. W. Rep., 293; Hunt v.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hays v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1894

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Flournoy v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1933
  2. Bowles v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1940
  3. Lewis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1919

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API