Court Opinion

ID: 9825442
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 13:00:49.460471+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:40:49.985670
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
Upon further consideration of this case we have reached the conclusion that the trial court was in error in permitting th£ witness, Dr. Lee, to testify, over defendant’s timely objection, as to certain tracks leading from the road to the river. The case built around defendant was entirely circumstantial, and, it not appearing wbat kind of-tracks were observed by the witness, whether those of man or beast, this testimony was inadmissible. Powell v. State, 20 Ala. App. 606, 104 So. 551. And for aught we can say the defendant was damaged materially by its introduction.
For this error the application for rehearing is granted, the judgment of affirmance set aside, and the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
Reversed and remanded.