In prosecution on bank theft and unlawful transportation of stolen goods charges, prosecutor erred during closing arguments by improperly vouching for credibility of govt. witness by urging jury to agree with him that said witness was one of “clearest, sharpest witnesses on trial,” and by misstating trial testimony by implying that all witnesses had identified defendant as individual on tape at scene of crime. However, both errors were harmless where evidence against defendant was substantial. Also, Dist. Ct. did not err in imposing $3,028,011.29 restitution order, even though defendant argued that restitution order was improper because it had not been supported by jury’s verdict.