
    CORTONELIA v. STATE.
    (No. 4202.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Oct. 25, 1916.)
    Criminal Law @=>872% — Vekdict by Less Than Twelve Jurors — Misdemeanor Case.
    In a prosecution for a misdemeanor, where a regular jury of twelve was impaneled, but nine only found a verdict of guilty, the other three refusing to concur, none of them having been in any way discharged by the judge before verdict for any reason', judgment of conviction could not stand.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Dec. Dig. @=>872%.]
    Appeal from Criminal District Court, Dallas County; Robt.' B. Seay, Judge.
    John Cortonelia was convicted of an aggravated assault, and he appeals.
    Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.
    W. W. Nelms, of Dallas, for appellant. C. C. McDonald, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   PRENDERGAST, P. J.

Appellant was convicted of an aggravated assault and fined $25.

The charge was a misdemeanor. The criminal district courts of Dallas county, under an Act of Legislature (Acts 1915, c. 35, § i) are given jurisdiction to try misdemeanor cases. A regular jury of 12 men was impaneled. Nine only found a verdict. The other three refused to concur in the verdict, and, it seems, may have wanted to find the defendant not guilty. Neither of these three were in any way discharged by the judge before the verdict for any reason. The appellant objected to the judge receiving the verdict of the nine jurors only. Notwithstanding this, the judge did receive it, and thereupon entered the judgment of conviction. This was error.

This is a companion case to that of No. 41-76, Salty Renfro v. State, 189 S. W. 137, and No. 4201, Jack Lane v. State, 189 S. W. 138, this day decided on appeal from the same district court. It is unnecessary to here again discuss the question. On the authority of the opinions in those eases, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded. 
      ©ssFor other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     