
    M. L. Osborn v. The State.
    No. 3267.
    Decided May 16, 1906.
    1. —Burglary—Evidence—Accomplice.
    Upon a trial for burglary where the evidence was overwhelmingly in support of the testimony of the accomplice the verdict will not be disturbed.
    2. —Same—Germane Testimony.
    Upon a trial for burglary where the evidence was conclusive as to the guilt of the defendant and the State seemed merely to have insisted on proving that he lived and associated with lewd negro women, such testimony was germane and proper.
    Appeal from the District Court of Bexar. Tried below before Hon. Edward Dwyer.
    Appeal from a conviction of burglary; penalty, two years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the case.
    No brief for appellant has reached the hands of the Reporter.
    
      J. E. Yantis, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.
   BROOKS, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of burglary, and his punishment assessed at two years confinement in the penitentiary. Appellant insists that the verdict of the jury is contrary to the law and the evidence. The evidence is overwhelming in its support of thtestimony of the accomplice.

Appellant also urges in his motion for new trial that the court erred in permitting the State, over the objection of appellant, to prove that defendant associated with lewd negro women. We find no bill presenting this question. Furthermore, the evidence is conclusive as to the guilt of the defendant, and the State seemed merely to have insisted on proving where he lived and with whom he associated. This is germane and proper testimony. No error appearing in this record, the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.  