
    [Crim. No. 835.
    Department Two.
    January 17, 1902.]
    THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. WILLIAM DAY, Appellant.
    Criminal Law—Felony—Appeal—Absence op Argument—Error not Appearing—Affirmance.—Upon appeal /from a judgment of conviction of a felony and from an order denying a new trial, where the transcript consists merely of the judgment-roll and notice of appeal, without any statement or bill of exceptions, and shows that the appellant had the aid of competent counsel upon the trial, but no brief has been filed in his behalf upon the appeal, if no error is apparent upon the face of the record, the judgment will be affirmed.
    APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County and from an order denying a new trial. F. B. Ogden, Judge.
    The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
    A. L. Frick, and H. S. Aldrich, for Appellant.
    Tirey L. Ford, Attorney-General, for Respondent.
   THE COURT.

The defendant was charged by the information with having committed the infamous crime against nature, was tried by a jury and found guilty, and was sentenced to imprisonment at San Quentin for the term of ten years, and he now appeals from said judgment and an order denying a new trial.

The transcript consists of the judgment-roll and notice of appeal, without any statement or bill of exceptions. Upon the trial he had the aid of competent counsel, but no brief has been filed in his behalf. The information was not objected to, and appears to be sufficient, nor do we discover any errors in the instructions given to the jury or in the proceedings.

The judgment and order appealed from are affirmed.-  