
    A. Ross and another v. The State.
    A judgment nisi described the offense charged as an “aggravated assault upon J. D., with a certain pistol, then and there a deadly weapon.” The scire facias simply recited the offense as an “ aggravated assault,” without further description. Held, that there is no variance ; and that the scire facias sufficiently notified the parties of the proceeding being had against them.
    Appeal from Fayette. Tried below before the Hon. T. C. Barden.
    The opinion states the case.
    No brief for appellants.
    
      William Alexander, Attorney General, for the State.
   Walker, J.

It would appear that counsel for the appellant insist that this judgment should be reversed on account of a supposed variance between the judgment nisi and the citation. The latter does not set out so fully, or with that particularity, the precise nature of the offense, as it is done in the judgment nisi and the bond. The principal was charged with an aggravated assault; the judgment nisi goes on to say that the assault was committed on one Jo Davis, with a certain pistol, etc. The citation simply refers to the matter as an aggravated assault, without saying upon whom or how committed. There is no variance, and the appellants were fully notified of the nature of the proceeding being had against them.

Finding no ground for reversing this judgment, it is affirmed.

Aeeirmed.  