Appellant was convicted of presenting fraudulent insurance claims and grand theft. On appeal, he argued that the jury could not compare an exemplar of appellant’s signature with signatures on the disputed documents to determine whether appellant signed the documents absent testimony from a handwriting expert. The appellate court disagreed and affirmed. Under Evidence Code section 1417, the jury was entitled to compare the signatures, and based on that comparison, they reasonably could have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt and without testimony from a handwriting expert that the questioned signatures were made by appellant.