The third subdivision of the charge of the court sufficiently explained to the jury the general principles of law with regard to the force and effect of
The charge in this case comes fully up to the measure of this standard, and is not obnoxious to any of the objections urged by defendant’s counsel in their brief filed with the record.
But it is objected in the motion in arrest of judgment that if the evidence as adduced warranted the conviction of defendant of any offence under the law, it was of the offence of illegally marking and branding, and not theft. For that matter, in our opinion the evidence would have sustained an indictment for either crime, and in the case as presented the illegal marking and branding furnished alone strong indicia, if not conclusive evidence, of theft. In connection with the other testimony, these facts fully warranted the jury in returning the verdict and the court in entering the judgment rendered in this case; and the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.