
    The State v. Rufus Pine.
    Where the indictment was for malicious mischief, and alleged that the defendant maliciously killed the dog of W., with the intention to injure the owner thereof, it was error to sustain a motion in arrest of judgment. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 2344, Note 679.)
    Appeal from Hunt. The case was tried before Hon. W. T. G-. Weaver, one of the district judges.
    The indictment was found under article 712 of the Penal Code, (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 2343, Hote 678,) for malicious mischief; for that on, &c.,the defendant “ did willfully and unlawfully kill one certain house dog, of the value of $50, the said house dog being then and there the corporeal personal property of one H. F. Wall, a resident citizen of said Hunt county, state of Texas; and the said Rufus Pine did then and there maliciously kill said house dog, with the intent then and there to injure the said H. F. Wall) owner, as aforesaid, of said house dog.”
    The jury found the defendant guilty, and assessed the fine at $150. The court sustained a motion to arrest the judgment, and the state appealed.
    Ho briefs have been furnished to the Reporter.
    
   Caldwell, J.

This is a good indictment, and charges the offense in the language of the statute. In the absence of any statement of facts, we are warranted in the presumption that the evidence sustained the verdict.

The judgment of the court helow in arrest is reversed, the cause remanded, with instructions to'render judgment on the verdict of the jury.

Reversed and remanded.  