
    (99 South. 733)
    (7 Div. 933.)
    
    TAYLOR v. STATE.
    (Court of Appeals of Alabama.
    Feb. 12, 1924.
    Rehearing Denied April 8, 1924.)
    1. Criminal law &wkey;>363 — -Evidence held admissible as part of res gestse.
    In a prosecution for receiving stolen property, testimony as to what was taken at time of larceny was admissible as part of res gestas.
    2. Criminal law <&wkey;>339 — Witness can identify suit of clothes without giving particular identifying description.
    ■ In prosecution for receiving stolen property, witness can testify as to identity of suit of clothes without giving any particular identifying description, probative force of such testimony being for jury.
    ig^sFor other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
    ■ Appeal from Circuit Court, Calhoun County; A. P. Agee, Judge.
    Sam Taylor was convicted of receiving stolen property, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Hugh Walker, of Anniston, for appellant.
    . Counsel argue the questions raised, but without citing authorities.
    Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and Lamar Eield, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
    Counsel cite' no authorities.
    
      
       Petition for certiorari dismissed 100 South. 331.
    
   SAMFORD, J.

The indictment contained two counts, one charging larceny and the other receiving stolen goods. The verdict of the jury is predicated on the second count. Whatever was taken at the time of the larceny is of the res gestse and is relevant to the issue.

A witness, if he knew, can testify as to the identity of a suit of clothes without giving any parii-ular identifying description. The probative íorce of sucb testimony is for the jury.

We have examined the entire record. There are no prejudicial errors, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.  