The opinion
ON REHEARING
TYSON, Judge.
At counsel’s urging, we have carefully considered this record again, and believe that the application for rehearing should be overruled. We add as additional footnotes 10 , 11 to our opinion the following, and as this opinion is so extended, the application is overruled.
Opinion extended, application overruled.
CATES, P. J., and ALMON and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
DeCARLO, J., recuses self.
. From Defendant’s Exhibit No. 12 to Miss Lois K. Thomas, Attorney, Berkeley, California, dated November 22, 1967, Volume I, Record, page 54:
“Alabama says that I committed two robberies there. This is untrue, and I never been convicted in Alabama for these charges. I don’t what agreement has been made between the states. I never been before a judge, where any question of extradition was spoken of. And for that matter I have never signed any papers as to my agreeing upon going back to Alabama. The only times the questions of this nature were spoken to me was at my parole hearing, with the members of the parole board. At that time I made the statement that I would die before I be sent back to Alabama.”
“Respectfully yours”
. Further, from Cross Examination, Volume II, Record, page 300, the following:
“Q (BY MR. BATCHELER:) I believe when we had the recess I had asked you a question with reference to the fact that up until around February the 22nd of 1970, or around January of 1971, that up until that time that you had refused to sign to ‘go to hold’ is that correct?
“A That’s correct, sir.
“Q Then, somewhere close to February the 22nd, or 23rd, or 24th, or 25th, along about that time, you did sign saying that you would come to Alabama ‘subject to hold,’ is that correct?
“A Yes, sir, that’s correct. That was the only time I had a parole to come here, and I signed it. The other time it was — The parole system was different to go to hold than it is to ‘come to hold