¶1 The conviction of this appellant rested upon the evidence of the state witness White, an admitted accomplice in the crime charged. Aside from his evidence, there was no testimony in this case tending to connect this appellant with the commission of thé offense charged. This rule of evidence is expressly provided by statute. Code 1923, § 5635. This question was raised in the lower court, and is properly presented and insisted upon here. It is conclusive of this appeal.
¶2 Reversed and remanded.