Byrd v. State

In Byrd v. State, 261 Ga. App. 483 (583 SE2d 170) (2003), the Court held that the trial court did not err in allowing a GBI chemist's supervisor to testify that a tested substance was cocaine, based on his review of the lab technician's file and the output generated by two different tests. The supervisor compared the results to published data to determine whether the substance tested was cocaine. The Court held that an expert's lack of personal knowledge "does not mandate the exclusion of the opinion but, rather, presents a jury question as to the weight which should be assigned the opinion." Id. at 484.