As I understand it, police officers may testify as experts as to a substance being marijuana without the requirement of having a lab work-up....any cases anyone could recomend reading on this issue...I just finished with Nalls v. State..would like some more input.

Dig up an old Texas Prosecutor from the TDCAA archives:

Some banjo playing investigator wrote a piece (Odor in the Court, or That's No Skunk in the Jury Box) about the SPU using a convicted dope peddler as an expert in a marijuana case. Judge Ernst ordered the man sitting in the witness box, to "...light up the evidence." After the joint was duly fired up, the vapors rebutted the defendant's alibi that the evidence was simply Oregano. Guilty.

"...light up the evidence." After the joint was duly fired up, the vapors rebutted the defendant's alibi that the evidence was simply Oregano...

A.P. - You could've gotten the Nobel Peace Pipe Prize for that literary rendition.

Or maybe crack pipe prize.

92 S.W.3d 531; 2002 Tex. Crim. App. is an unpublished opinion that says expert status is immaterial, it's just familiarity through training and experience...but they need to smell it.

SIEBERS v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS, FOURTH DISTRICT, SAN ANTONIO, 2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 9400 also says officer can prove up your mj for you.

I would guess by now there may be more recent decisions, but these might get you started.

thanks suzanne

I think the TDCAA Predicate Manual has some cites on that issue.