Davis v. State , 113 Tex. Crim. 429 ( 1929 )

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for being a delinquent child, with punishment at confinement in the State Juvenile Training School for a period of two years.

When any boy under seventeen years of age .violates the penal statutes of this State he thereby becomes a delinquent child. It was sufficiently alleged in the complaint and information herein that appellant had violated the law of this State. . He was charged with an aggravated assault, and this, under other parts of the statute, included the offense of simple assault, of which latter offense appellant was shown by the testimony to be guilty. The proof as to his age being that he was sixteen, did not measure up to the charge that he was an adult male person, but under the facts showing that he did make an assault, this justified the finding that he was guilty of a simple assault, and therefore became and was a delinquent child.

Our statute makes no distinction in regard to delinquency, based on the kind or character of law violation, but specifically makes a delinquent child of him who is under the prescribed age and violates any penal law.

In our opinion a charge which results in a finding of delinquency - may originate upon a complaint and information specifically charging certain acts committed and that same constituted the accused a delinquent; or the same may simply charge him in appropriate terms with the violation of some law. In the latter case if his age be not stated in the complaint and information, the age issue may be brought into the case in some one of the ways indicated in Art. 1084, C. C. P. The last paragraph of said article seems to answer certain contentions here made on behalf of appellant, for it is there said, regarding what shall be done when simply a violation of the law is charged and the age issue is raised, — “The judge shall transfer the case to the juvenile docket, and proceed to try the child under the same indictment, as a delinquent child.” In the instant case the information stated appellant’s age as under seventeen years and charged him with a violation of the law, but did not state that the act committed constituted appellant a delinquent child. As above indicated, we do not think this any valid objection to the information, nor to a valid trial and conviction of delinquency.

We have carefully examined each bill of exceptions in the record and same are fully disposed of in so far as same called for an expression of this court, in what we have said above.

The facts show without contradiction that appellant, a sixteen year old boy, met a nine year old girl on her way-to school as she was passing through woods; that he grabbed her from behind, threw her down, pinned her legs and arms down, unbuttoned her coat, and seemed to be getting something out of his pocket when she kicked him in the stomach and caused him to release her and let her get away. These facts support the conclusion of his guilt of a violation of the law and as a delinquent child.

No error appearing in the record, the judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.