¶1 Defendant, Arither . Thomas, appeals from his May 28, 1964, conviction of the offense of robbery armed. * On appeal he contends that there was insufficient evidence of his identity to support the jury verdict of guilty upon which this conviction was based.
¶2 The record discloses that a witness, Mrs. Shivlie, was present in the store when the holdup occurred; that the defendant was not masked; that this witness had a clear, unobstructed view of the defendant ; and that this witness was able to identify him. Defense counsel attempted to discredit the identification in his argument to the jury. The jury, if it believed the testimony of Mrs. Shivlie, had sufficient grounds to convict the defendant as charged.
¶3 It is not the function of an appellate court to be a reviewing jury. People v. Eagger (1966), 4 Mich App 449. Our proper role is to examine the record on appeal to determine whether or not a finding of fact by the jury was supported by credible evidence. In re Petition of Molisak (1939), 291 Mich 46. This Court will not disturb the verdict unless evidence fails to support the finding of fact by the jury. People v. Floyd (1966), 2 Mich App 168. We find that the jury’s verdict in the case before us is amply supported by the evidence.
¶4 Affirmed.