CONVICTED: Was justice served?
more information on voting
When you vote, you are voting on whether or not the punishment fit the crime, NOT on the severity of the case itself. If you feel the sentence was very weak, you would vote 1 star. If you feel the sentence was very strong, you would vote 5 stars.
Please vote honestly and realistically. These ratings will be used a a tool for many future programs, including a "People’s Choice" of best and worst sentencing, DA and judge "report cards", and more. Try to resist the temptation to vote 1 star on every case, even if you feel that 100 years in prison isn’t enough.
Case #6291 Rating: 3.3 out of 5
15 pit bulls used for fighting
Galt, CA (US)Incident Date: Thursday, Apr 1, 1999
County: Sacramento
Charges: Felony CTA
Disposition: Convicted
Defendant/Suspect: Samuel Anderson McCree
Case Updates: 1 update(s) available
On April 1, 1999, Galt California authorities raided the property of Samuel Anderson McCree, and discovered 15 pit bulls with physical traits consistent with those of fighting dogs.
Anderson was convicted, after a jury trial, of eight counts of possession and training of a fighting dog and two counts of causing a dogfight for gain. The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation for five years, with one year in county jail.
Case UpdatesConvicted dog-fighter Samuel McCree appealed his conviction to the California Court of Appeals.
Background information:
On April 1, 1999, authorities went to defendant's home in Galt to execute a search warrant. Authorities discovered evidence defendant was involved in dogfighting. One item discovered during the investigation was a stained roll of carpet. Carpets are used to provide traction for fighting dogs. Although the prosecution believed the stain was blood, a chemical analysis of the carpet came back presumptively negative. During his testimony, Officer Christopher Sanford agreed with the prosecutor "presumptively negative" meant "[t]he results didn't say that they knew for certain that it was negative, just presumed it was negative...."
Also found on defendant's property were 15 pit bull terriers. Inspection of the dogs revealed physical traits consistent with those of fighting dogs. Specifically, "dog 5" had deep scarring around the eyes, nose, muzzle, ears, forearms, and hind legs, and it had several broken teeth. Similarly, "dog 13," a two- to three-year-old pit bull, had scarring on his front legs and muzzle and had a limp in his left rear leg.
An expert testified dogs begin fighting when they are two to three years old. Experts, however, were unable to determine the age of many of defendant's dogs. In addition, experts were unable to determine the date of the dogs' scarring.
Many of the dogs were shipped to defendant from Georgia. One expert testified dogfighters commonly ship dogs to other parts of the country to engage in contract fights. Georgia, in particular, is considered a hotbed for dogfighting.
Defendant presented evidence he was not a dogfighter. He sought to prove he was only involved in legitimate dog activities. Defendant called witnesses, whom he knew from various legitimate dog activities, to prove he was not a dogfighter. Judith Brecka, who is an attorney, testified she and defendant were in the same dog association during the 1980's. She testified defendant participated in dog shows. Brecka explained she had never been involved in any organization advocating dogfighting and she had never associated with anyone as friends who was involved in dogfighting. On cross-examination, the prosecutor learned Brecka had represented a client in a civil case who had previously been convicted of dogfighting. Brecka also testified on cross-examination she knew Richard Stratton, an author and advocate of dogfighting, and she had read his books.
A jury found defendant Samuel Anderson McCree guilty of eight counts of possession and training of a fighting dog and of two counts of causing a dogfight for gain. The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed the defendant on probation for five years, with one year in county jail.
On appeal, McCree made three arguments: (1) the prosecutor engaged in misconduct by making an argument to the jury not based on evidence presented at trial; (2) the prosecutor engaged in misconduct while impeaching a witness; and (3) the court erred by allowing the prosecutor to argue an inference not supported by the evidence.
The Court of Appeals concluded that the defendant "failed to provide authoritative support for any contention of error and his contentions lack merit".
McCree's conviction was therefore affirmed. | Source: CA 3rd District Court of Appeal 2002 WL 276134
Update posted on Oct 9, 2007 - 1:01PM |
References« CA State Animal Cruelty Map
« More cases in Sacramento County, CA
|
