In State v. Rothlisberger, 2006 UT 49, 47 P.3d 1176, the Court affirmed the court of appeals and held that: (1) both fact and opinion testimony based on specialized knowledge fall within the scope of rule 702 of the Utah Rules of Evidence; (2) rule 701 of the Utah Rules of Evidence does not allow admission of testimony based on specialized knowledge, and; (3) Chief Adair's testimony as to the quantity of methamphetamine typical of personal use was expert testimony because it was based on knowledge beyond the ken of the average bystander. The Court also concluded that the harmless error issue urged by the State was outside the scope of the issue upon which we granted certiorari review. The Court accordingly declined to address that issue.