Appeal dismissed; court upheld acquittal on dog disturbance charges due to lack of evidence and procedural errors.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal filed by the victim, maintaining the first-instance acquittal of the defendant. The lower court found the defendant not guilty of disturbing the victim's peace with his dogs and failing to exercise due care, while the victim's testimony was deemed unreliable due to inconsistencies and lack of corroboration. The appellate court rejected the procedural complaints as baseless, noting the first-instance judge correctly exercised free evaluation of evidence and that the victim's claims were unsupported by physical evidence or expert opinions.