Franks

Appellant was charged with a violation of Penal Code, section 288. The court found him guilty of contributing to the delinquency of a minor (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 702), a lesser but necessarily included offense. His motion for a new trial was denied and probation was granted for three years on the condition, among others, that he would not *387 associate with children under 21 years of age except in the presence of responsible adults. This appeal is from the order denying appellant’s motion for a new trial and from the order granting probation. Appellant’s contentions are that (1) the evidence “clearly preponderates” against the judgment and (2) the rule that good character of itself can raise a reasonable doubt was disregarded by the court. There is no merit in either of these claims.

Appellant does not deny that there was substantial evidence to support the findings of the trial judge. Neither does he argue that any of the testimony relied upon by the prosecution is inherently incredible or improbable. His argument that the evidence “preponderates” in his favor and his suggestion that this court should reweigh the evidence betray an obvious misconception of the controlling…