1. Although the indictment, if treated as charging the defendant as accessory after the fact of the offense of burglary, may be technically defective, the true character of a criminal accusation is not fixed by the denomination given it by the pleader, but by its allegations; and the indictment in the present case is a sufficient charge against the defendant of the statutory offense of receiving stolen goods. Penal Code (1910), § 168.

2. There was no abuse of discretion in refusing a continuance.

3. Many of the numerous assignments of error are without merit, and none of them offer any substantial reason why the judgment of the lower court, in refusing a new trial, should be reversed.

4. The evidence fully supports the verdict. Judgment affirmed.