The errors urged upon this appeal from a conviction for manslaughter (22 D.C. Code § 2405) 1 all relate to asserted deficiencies in the instructions given by the trial judge. None of these alleged shortcomings were brought to the attention of the trial court by appropriate objection or request, see Rule 52(b), Fed.R.Crim. P., and we are not disposed on this record to regard them as constituting “plain error” necessitating reversal in the interests of justice. The case does provide another instance of the difficulties which have recurred because of the inadequacies, at least in certain evidentiary contexts, of some of the manslaughter instructions used in this Circuit, see United States v. Dixon, 135 U.S.App.D.C.-, 419 F.2d 288 (1969), but the trial here preceded Dixon and the problems there noted are presumably in the course of being resolved in the District Court.

Affirmed.