Meyer

The grand jury presented an indictment against the defendant, he appeared and entered his plea, a trial was had before the court sitting with a jury, the jury returned a verdict of guilty, the defendant made a motion for a new trial, the motion was denied and he has appealed from the judgment and the order denying his motion for a new trial.

The defendant contends that the indictment is insufficient to sustain the verdict, that the verdict is contrary to the evidence, and that the verdict is contrary to law, and he presents the three contentions together. The indictment alleged the commission of certain acts by the defendant on the twenty-eighth day of April, 1928, on the person of each of three little girls, Esther Stanghellini, age twelve; Sophie Churich, age ten, and Betty Tisma, age seven. In the first, third, and fifth counts the pleader charged assault to commit rape. In the second, fourth, and sixth counts the pleader charged a violation of section 288 of the Penal Code. The defendant calls attention to the fact that by its terms section 288 enacts a law supplementing other offenses defined by other statutes and is not applicable if the acts charged fall within the…