Rose

I concur in the judgment. The information is very uncertain, and radically defective. Two offenses — a misdemeanor and a felony—can be seen in the allegations, but neither appear with that certainty required by the provisions of the Penal Code. It would be useless to attempt to show the defects, as the information is hopelessly insufficient.

Rose, one of the defendants in this action, was tried and convicted of the crime of fraudulently winning money by means of a game of bunco. He moved for a new trial, which was granted, and the people appeal.

One of the grounds upon which the motion was granted was, that a witness for the people was allowed, as an ex *379 pert, to describe, not the game actually played by the defendants, but the game of bunco generally. His testimony on this point was as follows: —

“It generally takes three men to start a game. The first one, after the victim is picked out, he finds his antecedents, his name, and his relations, and where he is from. After he is sufficiently conversant with the antecedents of a person, his family, and so on, he communicates to what we call a capper. The capper introduces himself as a relative of some friend, or some relative of his. The capper approaches the victim,— he has various names, — or sucker,—‘How do you do?’ Mr. So-and-so probably not recognizing him, he says, ‘ I am so-and-so. I met you at such a place,— met some of your relatives.’ Asks him to take a walk. They take a walk, and come to the place. It is upstairs. Not necessarily upstairs. In this case…