
    Howard Mangum v. The State.
    No. 2604.
    Decided June 27, 1913.
    Assault to Rape—Sufficiency of the Evidence.
    Where, upon trial of assault to rape upon a female under the age of consent, the evidence sustained the conviction, under a proper charge of the court, there was no error.
    Appeal from the District Court' of Angelina. Tried below before the Hon. L. D. Guinn.
    Appeal from a conviction of assault to rape; penalty, two years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
    The State’s testimony showed.that defendant assaulted the alleged female, who was a child of tender years, and attempted to have carnal intercourse with her; while the defendant denied all the'testimony of the State’s witness.
    The opinion states the case.
    
      Wright, Jordan & Fortenberry and A. Hi. Campbell, for appellant.
    O. F. Lane, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.
   PRENDERGAST, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of an assault with intent to rape a little girl between seven and eight years of age. His penalty is fixed at two years in the penitentiary.

The sole question is raised only by the motion for new trial, which complains that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict.

It would serve no useful purpose in this or any other case, to recite the evidence. We have carefully read and considered it and have reached the conclusion that the evidence is sufficient to sustain the conviction. In addition to our careful study and consideration of this evidence a jury of fair and impartial men, before a. fair and impartial trial judge, heard all this evidence, saw the witnesses, their manner of testifying and their manner, of examination. The jury found him guilty and the judge sanctioned the verdict. Hnder the circumstances we do not feel authorized to disturb the verdict.

The judgment is, therefore, affirmed.

Affirmed.  