Garcia

By the information in this case T. N. Garcia and two females—Susie Douglass and Rosa Durbin— were jointly accused of grand larceny committed in the stealing, etc., from “the ownership and possession of Thomas Tom *368 linson,” certain money of the value of $295, the property of said Tomlinson. Garcia was tried separately. He was convicted of the offense charged, and has appealed.

Appellant demurred to the information on the alleged ground that the same “is indefinite, in that it cannot be ascertained therefrom whether said larceny is from the person or not.” The demurrer was rightly overruled. Indefiniteness of the .information is not a ground for demurrer thereto: Pen. Code, sec. 1004; People v. Markham, 64 Cal. 157 , 49 Am. Rep. 700 , 30 Pac. 620 . Moreover, although the language of the information varied somewhat from the usual formula, yet, since it was alleged that the property stolen was above the value of $50, the offense charged was within the statutory definition of grand larceny, whether the stealing was from the person or not: Pen. Code, sec. 487. So that the information can no more be called indefinite for failing to show whether the money was taken from the person of…