Ruef
People v. Ruef
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Kerrigan, J.
The defendant was convicted of the crime of burglary in the second degree. From the judgment of conviction and from the order denying his motion for a new trial this appeal is prosecuted.
The evidence shows that the defendant with others on or about the twenty-ninth day of April, 1921, burglarized certain premises on First Avenue, in the city of San Francisco, taking therefrom a large quantity of wine and liquor. One witness testified that he saw three men in front of the premises from which said property was stolen early in the morning of the burglary. Entrance to the premises was effected through a large hole made by the use of a brace and bit and a saw. The property was carried away in an automobile. About the time of the burglary the defendant had rented a house on Rivoli Street, in said city, in which an insurance business purported to be conducted. Although the defendant negotiated the lease and paid the rent, the insurance business, if carried on at all, was not conducted in his name, but in that of E. G. Walter & Co., as shown by a sign upon the front of the premises. Subsequent to the burglary a detective searched these premises and found thereon two hack-saws, a…