Colombo

The information filed in this ease charged the defendant with the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor on the thirteenth day of January, 1924. In a separate count it charged:

The information then concluded in the stereotyped language, “contrary to the form, force and effect of the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the people of the state of California. ’ ’

The defendant entered a plea of not guilty and denied the prior conviction. The jury returned a verdict of guilty as charged and found that the defendant had suffered a prior conviction of violation of the Wright Act. (Stats. 1921, p. 79.) This appeal is from the judgment entered on the verdict and from the order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial.

The sheriff of the county testified that on the thirteenth day of January, 1924, he went to defendant’s hotel, armed with a search-warrant, for the purpose of searching the premises for intoxicating liquors; that when he drove up in his automobile the defendant’s wife “hollered ‘Charley’ three times very loud, or ‘Carlo’; it sounded like Charley to me”; that the witness immediately ran to the kitchen and that about the time…