Green

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction of the crime of robbery and from an order denying her motion for a new trial.

The first point advanced by appellant is that the verdict is contrary to the evidence. In that connection it is contended that the testimony by which the identification of ^defendant as the robber was established was so weak and unsatisfactory that'“there is no evidence worthy of the name to identify the defendant Johnnie Green, as one of the perpetrators of the offense.” Condensing the testimony relating to the commission of the crime of which defendant was charged, it appears that defendant was positively identified by the complaining witness as one of the robbers. However, on cross-examination, the attention of the witness was directed to the fact that on a former trial of defendant, in giving a description of defendant, the witness had stated that the color of her eyes was blue, whereas, as a matter of fact, they were black. Also that, although the defendant had a somewhat prominent scar on her nose, “the complaining witness did not notice it” on the occasion when the robbery occurred. The evidence further showed that at the time in question “the lady…