Walden

Defendant Walden was convicted of robbery after a trial before a judge and jury. A new trial was denied by the judge and sentence was pronounced. Defendant appeals from the denial of his motion for a new trial and from the judgment had on the verdict.

Appellant advances seven points upon which he asks a reversal of the case. Points I, II, IV, V and VI are based upon alleged misconduct of a deputy district attorney during the trial. Point III is based upon an alleged error of the court in the course of trial. Point VII is based upon a claim that the evidence does not support the verdict. We shall hereafter refer to appellant as defendant.

A bank was robbed by several men and a partial identification was had of defendant as one of the robbers, though it cannot be said that this partial identification was sufficient, standing alone, to justify a conclusion by the jury that the defendant was one of the robbers. An identification of defendant’s automobile was had as the car that drove from the scene of the robbery immediately after its commission, with the robbers therein. A substantial part of a quantity of express money orders that had been stolen from the bank at this robbery was…