Warren

The defendant was convicted of the crime of grand larceny, and has appealed from the judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

It is conceded that the evidence was sufficient to justify the verdict, but certain errors are urged which we will notice in the order presented in defendant’s brief. It is claimed that the indictment does not state facts sufficient to constitute a public offense, for the reason that the personal property alleged to have been stolen is not described with sufficient certainty. The description is "four calves, then and there the personal property of Anton Luchessa.” This description is sufficiently certain. (People v. Littlefield, 5 Cal. 355 ; People v. Stanford, 64 Cal. 27 ; State v. Stelly, 48 La. Ann. 1480 ; State v. Friend, 47 Minn. 449 .) Defendant made a motion for a new trial upon the ground of newly discovered evidence. In support of the motion he filed the affidavit of one Music, in which it was stated by Music that he was -at the ranch of J. A. Warren, Sr., the father of defendant, two or three days before the seventeenth day of November, 1899, and that the father and two of his sons were marking and branding calves in the…