Hadnot v. State
Alabama Court of Appeals
Appeal from Montgomery City Court. Heard before Hon. Armstead Br'own. James Hadnot and another were convicted of burglary and they appeal.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Montgomery City Court. Heard before Hon. Armstead Br'own. James Hadnot and another were convicted of burglary and they appeal. The court erred in excluding evidence as to what the dogs had done in the past, and as to whether or not they were ever known to leave the track and hunt rabbits. — -Simpson v. The State, 111 Ala. 6; Richardson v. The State, 145 Ala. 46; Hodge v. The State, 98 Ala. 10; Pedigo v. Commonwealth, 103 Ky. 41; 97 N. W. 598; 129 N. C. 497; Jackson v. The State, 159 Ala. 23. This case should be affirmed on. the authority of Simpson v. The State, 111 Ala. 6.
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, P. J.
When evidence of the trailing of the defendant in a criminal case by dogs trained to track human beings has been admitted against him, he should have the fullest opportunity by cross examination to inquire into the breeding and testing of the dogs, and into any facts or circumstances tending to show that, by reason of their unreliability, or of their lack of proper training, the incriminating value of the evidence was impaired.—Richardson v. State, 145 Ala. 46, 41 South. 82. But the facts or circumstances so sought to be brought out must be such as would have a proximate tendency to shed…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Simpson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
- Richardson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1906
- Wells Amusement Co. v. MeansAlabama Court of Appeals · 1911
3Cited by7 opinions
- Trawick v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1983
- Jennings v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1987
- Allen v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1913
- Roberson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1976
- Valentine v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.