Davenport

Defendant was charged with the crime of grand larceny, for stealing from the person of one B. H. Baumeister, on- the twelfth day of March of this year, one diamond stud of the value of $500. He was found guilty as charged, and upon judgment being rendered against him, he took an appeal to this court from the judgment and order denying his motion for a new trial.

The first contention made by appellant is that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict.

The prosecution introduced at the trial the testimony of two witnesses, Dr. B. II. Baumeister and Dr. G. N. Torello, who are physicians. The testimony of these witnesses, as set forth in the transcript, shows the following state of facts:

Defendant was not apprehended until three and a half months after the occurrence in question, but Dr. Baumeister was positive in his identification of him as one of the three men—as the one who pressed against and jostled the witness from the right. In this connection the witness testified that the man who jostled him from the right had a pimply face, which caused the witness as a medical man to especially notice him. The record does not disclose whether or not the defendant at the time…