It is unnecessary, however, to discuss this point, as an examination of the whole record developes the fact that the absence spoken of was at the time the order was entered fixing the day for sentence. This is not error. (People v. Galvin , 9 Cal. 115.) It appears that the Court, in the absence of the defendant, fixed the time of judgment, etc. But the record shows affirmatively that at every other stage of the proceedings the defendant was present in person and by counsel.