Hill v. State

Decided July 1, 1871

Texas Supreme Court · decided 1871-07-01

Tried below before the Hon. Charles Soward. One of the head notes condenses, but fully comprehends, the • testimony most unfavorable to the appellant. Some of the witnesses saw no attempt on his part to draw his pistol, and otherwise sustained his version of self defense against an apprehended assault upon himself. There ivas no proof that Stimpson, the assaultee, was an officer.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 1983

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1871-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Ogden, J.

¶1The indictment in this case is insufficient, because it does not charge an assault, as defined by the statute. The charge of the court is erroneous, in that it instructed the jury that they would be authorized, under the evidence, to acquit the defendant of an aggravated assault, if they did not believe him guilty of that offense, and find him guilty of a simple assault. If defendant was guilty of any assault under the evidence, it could l e none other than an aggravated assault, and not a simple assault. The evidence was wholly insufficient to support any verdict of guilty, as no offense was proven, and no venue was proven.

¶2The judgment is reversed and the case dismissed.

¶3Reversed and dismissed.