State v. Rogers, ___ N.C. App. ___, 796 S.E.2d 91 (Feb. 7, 2017)

rev’d in part on other grounds, ___ N.C. ___, 817 S.E.2d 150 (Aug. 17, 2018)

In this drug case, officers did not offer improper opinion testimony. The defendant argued that the officers’ testimony constituted improper opinion testimony as to the defendant’s guilt. Both officers testified about the defendant’s conduct and how it related, in their experience, to activity by drug dealers. The officers’ testimony was not improper opinion testimony concerning guilt but rather ordinary testimony expressing their own experiences and observations.