We find the evidence identifying this defendant as the bank robber quite sufficient to support the conviction.

The defendant took the witness stand in support of a claimed alibi. In the course of his direct examination, he volunteered the fact that he had been apprehended in the act of a later robbery of the same bank. Under those circumstances, there was certainly no impropriety in permitting the District Attorney on cross-examination to inquire about his conviction for the second robbery.

Affirmed.