Paris v. State (135 S.W. 381, 1911)

PRENDERGAST, J.

The appellant was ■charged hy complaint and information with committing an aggravated assault on Lula Paris; he being an adult male, and she a female. The appellant waived a jury and pleaded guilty. The court assessed a fine of $25 and six months’ imprisonment in the ■county jail. In the judgment, properly en-1 tered up, the court states that the appellant was on the same day in that court convicted of a misdemeanor, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $50, and ordered that the judgment in this case should commence when the former judgment had been fully satisfied.

There is no statement of facts, bills of exception, or other complaint by appellant than a motion for new trial, which sets’ up that the judgment is not supported by the evidence and is contrary to the law. We presume it may have been intended by the appellant to complain of this judgment because of the cumulative penalties. There was no error on this account, and there is no error whatever in the record. Code Cr. Proc. 1895, art. 840; Stewart v. State, 37 Tex. Cr. R. 135, 38 S. W. 1143; Ex parte Cox, 29 Tex. App. 84, 14 S. W. 396.

The judgment is affirmed.