Waddill v. State
Waddill v. State
Opinion of the Court
In Slaughter v. The State, 24 Texas R., 410, the verdict, upon an indictment for murder, was “guilty,” and the punishment assessed was adequate only for an offense of a minor degree.
. The court say: “On an indictment for an offense divided into different degrees, a general verdict ©f guilty, assessing a penalty applicable only to one of the inferior degrees, and which does not find the defendant not guilty of the higher degrees, is insufficient to support a judgment of conviction; and is ground to .arrest the . judgment.”
In the present case the verdict was not general but special, and the punishment determined by the jury was the proper punishment for the guilt of the defendant, as found by them. It cannot, therefore, afford ground for arresting the judgment. The judgment is affirmed and cause remanded.
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- W. H. Waddill v. State
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. On an indictment for an assault with intent to murder, the jury returned a verdict of “ guilty of aggravated assault,” and assessed a fine of $250 as the penalty; and there was judgment below in accordance with the verdict. The defendant, relying on Slaughter v. The State, 24 Texas, 410, moved in arrest, on the ground that the verdict did not support the judgment; and the same ground is relied on in this court. Held, that the verdict in this case is special, not general, and the case cited does not apply—wherefore the judgment below is affirmed.