Brott v. State
| Citation | 97 N.W. 593,70 Neb. 395 |
| Decision Date | 02 December 1903 |
| Docket Number | 13,325 |
| Parties | GEORGE W. BROTT v. STATE OF NEBRASKA |
| Court | Supreme Court of Nebraska |
ERROR to the district court for Nemaha county: JOHN S. STULL JUDGE. Reversed.
REVERSED.
H. A Lambert and J. S. McCarty, for plaintiff in error.
Frank N. Prout, Attorney General, and Norris Brown, for the state.
George W. Brott was charged with burglary and convicted. The court received as evidence of guilt the fact that bloodhounds after being taken to the place where the crime was committed, appeared to trail the burglar to defendant's house. The competency of this evidence is the only question necessary to consider in disposing of the case. The conduct of the dogs was, perhaps, rightly received, in connection with an admission made by Brott, as evidence tending to prove that he committed the crime charged in the information; but it was also received as proof of independent crimes which the state brought to the attention of the jury, to which the admission did not relate. The only evidence of these independent crimes was the inference afforded by the conduct of the dogs. If such evidence is incompetent the conviction can not stand. The argument of the attorney general is that the bloodhound has an exceptionally fine perception of scent; that, in following a trail and discriminating between smells, he seldom or never errs; and that knowledge of his extraordinary aptitude is so nearly universal that courts will act upon it without proof. The bloodhound has, of course, a great reputation for sagacity, and there is a prevalent belief that, in the pursuit and discovery of fugitive criminals, he is practically infallible. It is a commonly accepted notion that he will start from the place where a crime has been committed, follow for miles the track upon which he has been set, find the culprit, confront him, and, mirabile dictu, by accusing bay and mien, declare, "Thou art the man." This strange misbelief is with some people apparently incorrigible. It is a delusion which abundant actual experience has failed to dissipate. It lives on from generation to generation. It has still the attractiveness of a fresh creation. "Time writes no wrinkle on its brow." But it is, nevertheless, a delusion, an evident and obvious delusion. The sleuthhound of fiction is a marvelous dog, but we find nothing quite like him in real life. We repudiate utterly the suggestion that there is any common knowledge of the bloodhound's capacity for trailing, which would justify us in accepting his conclusions as trustworthy under circumstances like those disclosed by the present record. The burglary was committed on the morning of July 5, before daylight. The trailing did not commence until about five in the afternoon. In the meantime the trail, near the scene of the crime, had been walked over, closely paralleled, and crossed, directly and obliquely, perhaps, a hundred times. And the sun had been shining on it steadily for more than twelve hours. The situation the dogs had to deal with was an exceptionally difficult one, and it was, we think, reversible error to accept their conclusion as legal evidence of defendant's guilt. To get a nearer and clearer view of the nature of the evidence erroneously admitted, let us consider...
To continue reading
Request your trial