All accident reports made by persons involved in accidents or by garages shall be without prejudice to the individual so reporting and shall be for the confidential use of the director or of other state agencies having use for the records for accident prevention purposes; except, that the director may disclose the identity of a person involved in an accident when such identity is not otherwise known or when such person denies his or her presence at such accident. No such report shall be used as evidence in any trial, civil or criminal, arising out of an accident; except, that the department shall furnish upon demand of any person who has, or claims to have made such a report, or, upon demand of any court, a certificate showing that a specified accident report has or has not been made to the director solely to prove a compliance or a failure to comply with the requirement that such a report be made to the director.
(Acts 1943, No. 558, p. 548, §11.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
10
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 1997–2024 · leading case:
Crusoe v. Davis, 176 So. 3d 1200 (Ala. 2015).
Crusoe v. Davis, 176 So. 3d 1200 (Ala. 2015).
· cites it 18× “I write specially to address a potential alternative ground for affirming the trial court’s order — the applicability to this case of § 32-10-11, Ala.Code 1975, the accident-report-confidentiality statute.”
Mainor v. Hayneville Tel. Co., 715 So. 2d 800 (Ala. Civ. App. 1997).
· cites it 7× “Both at trial and on appeal, Mainor argued that the admission of the accident reports violated § 32-10-11, Ala.Code 1975, which provides that police accident reports are inadmissible in any civil or criminal trial arising out of an accident.”
Shanklin v. State, 187 So. 3d 734 (Ala. Crim. App. 2014).
“See also § 32-10-11 Ala.Code 1975. They are deemed hearsay and do not fall within the ‘business records’ exception to that exclusionary rule.”
Leonard v. Cunningham, 4 So. 3d 1181 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008).
“§ 32-10-11, Ala.Code 1975; Nettles v. Bishop, 289 Ala.”
Booker v. McKenzie, 37 So. 3d 128 (Ala. 2009).
“In response to the motion for a change of venue, Booker also argued that Officer Dacosta’s accident report was inadmissible.”
Porter v. State, 33 So. 3d 30 (Ala. Crim. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “"'") Because identity of the perpetrator was the main issue in the case, I can think of no strategy that would excuse failing to suppress the identification attributed to Deputy Forester.”
Abbott v. Mega Trucking, LLC (M.D. Ala. 2023).
· cites it 2× “Code § 32-10-11 (providing that accident reports cannot “be used as evidence in any trial, civil or criminal, arising out of an accident”); see also Brannon v.”
Hart v. Suarez (CONSENT) (M.D. Ala. 2024).
· cites it 2× “Further, the Court notes that Defendants raise new arguments in their reply brief for the inadmissibility of the police report, such as the potential applicability of Ala. Code § 32-10-11 . It is improper to raise arguments for the first time in a reply brief, as doing so…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.