Court Opinion

ID: 9781235
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 16:24:37.626055+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:34:22.014164
License: Public Domain

STEELMAN, Judge
concurring.
I concur with the majority opinion. As to section IIIB it was error for the court to admit lay opinion testimony that the substance found on defendant’s person was cocaine. State v. Llamas-Hernandez, 189 N.C. App. 640, 652, 659 S.E.2d 79, 86 (2008) (Steelman, J., dissenting), rev’d for reasons stated in dissent, 363 N.C. 8, 673 S.E.2d 658 (2009). However, it was not plain error. In its instructions to the jury on the charge of possession with intent to sell and deliver cocaine, the trial court charged the jury on constructive possession. Thus the jury was not limited to the substance found on defendant’s person, but could also have considered the bag in the defendant’s vehicle containing eighty-three grams of cocaine in deciding defendant’s guilt or innocence on this charge.