Singh

The defendants in this ease were convicted of the crime of robbery, and have appealed to this court from the judgment and from an order denying them a new trial.

The alleged error of the trial court in the admission of evidence, and the refusal to give certain requested instructions, are the only points presented and discussed in support of the appeal.

The defendant Hajara Singh was called and testified as a witness in his own behalf. Upon direct examination he testified that he was at the place where the robbery occurred on the day that it was charged to have been committed. Upon cross-examination he was asked if he did not state, in the presence of several deputy sheriffs, on the day that he was arrested and brought into the sheriff’s office that he was not at the place of the robbery on the day of its commission. The defendant failed to give a direct answer to the question. The question was substantially repeated several times, but upon each occasion the defendant to all appearances willfully evaded giving a direct answer. Thereupon the district attorney asked the general question, “Well, did a conversation of that kind occur down there in the jail?” Again the defendant…