Padilla

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction of the crime of robbery and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

The first point presented by appellant is made in connection with the introduction in evidence, over defendant’s objection, of the testimony given by a certain witness at the preliminary examination of defendant before the committing magistrate.

Section 68-6 of the Penal Code is authority for the rule that the testimony of a witness taken at a preliminary examination of a defendant may be read at the trial in the superior court upon its being satisfactorily shown to the court that such witness cannot with due diligence be found within the state.

It is contended by appellant that “there was no evidence introduced that showed or tended to show that the witness E. Goldbaum Padilla could not, with due diligence, be found within this state.”

Specifically, it is urged by appellant that the testimony given by Helen Goldbaum Padilla to the effect that one week before the trial she received a letter postmarked at El Paso, Texas, from the witness whose testimony taken before the committing magistrate was sought to be introduced in evidence, was insufficient to…