For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court convicted the habitual larceny part of the instant charges.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of habitual larceny.

The argument that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the legality of arrest is not a legitimate ground for appeal since the defendant alleged in the ground for appeal that he did not regard it as the ground for appeal or that the court below did not consider it as the subject of ex officio

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.