Soto

A jury found appellant Alex Paul Soto guilty of possession of marijuana, in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11530. His codefendants, Goodwin and Kramer, were found guilty of the sale of marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11531). Since this is the appeal of Soto alone from the judgment against him, it will not he necessary to describe the entire record of the trial. In passing upon the appellant’s contention that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict, the evidence most favorable to the People must be considered, including every fact which the jury could reasonably have deduced from the evidence. (People v. Newland, 15 Cal.2d 678, 681 [ 104 P.2d 778 ].)

Those facts include the following;

Officer Olsen then arrested both men and- took the box. It contained a brick of compressed marijuana weighing approximately 1 kilogram, wrapped in cellophane.

Appellant does not deny that he was carrying the contraband at the time of his arrest, but he does contend that the evidence fails to show he knew at that time what was in the box.

The People were of course required to prove that appellant had knowledge of the character of the article possessed, but this is…