People v. Ratterman

MARKS, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment pronounced on defendant after he had been found guilty of grand theft, and from the order denying his motion for new trial. He was charged with robbery, and kidnaping for the purpose of robbery.

Defendant complains of the admission in evidence, over his objections, of several photographs, on the ground that no proper foundation had been laid for their admission. These photographs portrayed the scene of the crime and a garage which had been rented by defendant, where articles of his clothing were found which were similar to those worn by the guilty party.

The complaining witness testified in effect that each photograph correctly represented the objects in it and -also the scene of the crime. Defendant did not ask to examine the witness on

voir dire.

He did not cross-examine the witness on this- subject, nor did he during the trial produce any evidence to indicate that the photographs did not correctly portray that which they purported to represent. Under these circumstances error cannot be predicated on the admission of this evidence.

(Diller

v.

Northern California Power Co.,

162 Cal. 531 [123 Pac. 359, Ann. Cas. 1913D, 908];

People

v.

Crandall,

125 Cal. 129 [57 Pac. 785] ;

People

v.

Mahatch,

148 Cal. 200 [82 Pac. 779];

People

v.

Sambrano,

33 Cal. App. (2d) 200 [91 Pac. (2d) 221].)

[600]