Summary
In State v. Wolfley, 75 Kan. 406 [12 Ann. Cas. 412, 11 L. R. A. (N. S.) 87, 89 P. 1046], it is said: "There was no error in allowing opinions to be given regarding the inferences to be drawn from the appearance of cattle brands, even by witnesses whose experience was not such as to enable them to speak with authority, for they had some special training in the matter — the extent of it went to the weight, rather than to the admissibility, of their testimony."
Summary of this case from People v. HinkleOpinion
No. 49A02-0502-CR-121.
September 12, 2005.
Unpublished memorandum decision. Affirmed.
BARNES, J. Concurs.
CRONE, J. Concurs.