State v. Bull

Appellant was convicted of the crime of burglary in the first degree for his alleged aid as a lookout in the burglarizing of a poolroom in Minidoka.

It is urged that the information was defective, that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict, and that the court erred in its instructions to the jury.

The information did not set out the ownership of the pool-hall nor allege that it was the property of one other than the appellant. The only reasons for requiring such allegations are to permit greater certainty in the identification of the building entered and to show that the building…