Barker

The defendant was convicted of burglary and sentenced to imprisonment in the state prison. He appeals from the judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial. He asks for a reversal upon the grounds,—1. That the verdict is not supported by the evidence; and 2. That the court committed errors during the trial in ruling upon the admissibility of evidence.

1. The first ground is not tenable. The evidence presented some room for a plausible argument to the jury that it was not sufficient to warrant a verdict of guilty; but there was evidence tending to show defendant’s guilt sufficient to put that question fairly within the province of the jury.

2. We do not think that there should be a new trial for any asserted error in ruling upon the admissibility of evidence. The only point under this head which calls for any considerable discussion arises on the alleged error in admitting in evidence the testimony of August Amiot which had been given at the preliminary examination. The witness Bra-ig, a police officer, testified that Amiot bade him good-by in San Francisco, where he had been living, and told him that he was going to Seattle, in the state of Washington, to engage…