Bickner

By an amended information filed by the district attorney of Tulare County the defendant was accused of the crime of petty theft, and with having suffered two prior convictions of felonies. He pleaded not guilty to the charge of petty theft, and guilty to one prior conviction, but apparently not guilty to the second. It was stipulated that the second prior conviction should not be considered during the trial. The appellant was found guilty as charged and has appealed from the judgment pronounced upon him and from the order denying his motion for a new trial.

The appellant urges as grounds for a reversal of the judgment that the evidence does not support the verdict and judgment; that the trial court erred in its instructions to. the jury; that it erred in ruling on objections to questions propounded to witnesses by counsel, and that it erred in denying appellant’s motion for arrest of judgment.

It appears from the record that appellant was á guest at the home of J. E. Smith, the complaining witness, in Visalia on April 23 and 24, 1932; that Smith was the owner of a twelve-gauge Winchester repeating shotgun which was in his home during the time of appellant’s visit, and was missed…