The Court of Appeals held that unscientific "training and experience" testimony regarding the identity of alleged marijuana was not reversible error under the "plain error" test used to examine admission of evidence when there is no objection.
With the legalization of hemp came the question of under what circumstances the odor or appearance of cannabis, indistinguishable from hemp, would form probable cause to search a vehicle, home, or person. A recent North Carolina Court of Appeals case provides a little guidance.
The North Carolina Court of Appeals reversed two convictions of maintaining a building or vehicle for drug purposes, citing insufficient evidence. This is an important case defining what the crime is not, and should provide guidance for prosecutors and defense attorneys who have to deal with these allegations which are often used as bargaining chips to convince defendants to plead guilty to other crimes in a plea bargain.
