
    HAYTER v. STATE.
    (No. 3178.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    June 24, 1914.
    Rehearing Denied Oct. 14, 1914.)
    Criminal Law (§ 1124) — Appeal—Jury.
    The trial court’s refusal to disturb a verdict-on the ground that the jury were affected by outside influences from a mob could not be disturbed on appeal in a criminal case, where the evidence heard by the trial court on that point was not brought up.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ .2939, 2946-2948; Dec. Dig. § 1124.]
    Appeal from District Court, Falls County; Richard I. Munroe, Judge.
    Jeff Hayter was convicted of assault to rape, and appeals.
    Affirmed.
    A. T. Russell, of Nacogdoches, for appellant. C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
    
      
       For other eases see same topic and section NUMBER in Deo. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No. Series.& Rep’r Indexes
    
   PRENDERGAST, J.

Appellant was convicted of an assault to rape, and bis punishment assessed at 10 years in the penitentiary.

The sole question appellant presents in his brief is his contention that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict. We have carefully read and studied the evidence. It is-unnecessary to recite it. The court gave a correct charge. He also submitted everything that the evidence raised in appellant’s favor. The jury decided every issue against him. In our opinion the evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict and we would not be authorized to reverse the case on that account.

One other question is suggested, and that is that outside influences from a mob affected the jury. The record shows that the court heard evidence on that issue, and decided it against appellant. We are in no way furnished with the evidence. We must presume that the court correctly decided the question.

The judgment is affirmed.  