Roberts

The defendant, Roberts, was charged with and convicted of grand larceny, and this appeal is from the judgment and the order denying his motion for a new trial.

Defendant claims that the court erred in refusing to give at request of defendant the following instruction: “Not only must the prosecution prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the crime charged has been committed, but they must prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant and no one else committed the offense; in the absence of such proof the defendant must be acquitted.” The evidence in this case showed that two other persons besides the defendant were present and were concerned in, and aided and abetted the defendant in the commission of the offense. Under the requested instruction the jury would have been obliged to acquit the defendant although convinced that the three persons jointly and together committed the offense. Such is not the law. The instruction was properly refused.

The defendant requested the following instruction: "Offers to prove certain alleged facts which have been made in your presence are not evidence, and you should not take the same into consideration, nor allow yourselves to be in any…