Barthleman

Defendant was charged with the murder of one Mabel Barthleman, and was convicted of murder iiv the first degree, the jury assigning the death penalty. He appeals *10 from the judgment and from an o^der denying him a new trial, and from an order denying his motion in arrest of judgment. .

There was no conflict of evidence, and there is no question whatever touching the facts of the homicide. The defendant and. the deceased were at one time husband and wife, and prior to the date of the homicide had been divorced.' Immediately before the commission of the homicide, appellant, who had come into the presence of the deceased, asked her if he could have the child that had been born to them during their marriage, and, upon her saying “no,” he drew a revolver arid shot her several times, inflicting mortal wounds from which she shortly afterward died. Apparently, the homicide was a malicious, cold-blooded murder, unjustifiable and indefensible. The only defense offered was insanity.

The main grounds for a reversal are alleged errors committed by the court in the matter of instructing the jury; and they consist mostly of exceptions to the refusal of the court to give certain instructions…