With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Grounsell testified that the drugs found in Jamison’s truck had a street value of between $2,750.00 and $9,319.00, depending on the quantities sold. In his defense, Jamison claimed the drugs belonged to someone else, possibly one of his employees who also had access to the truck. We agree with the trial court that jurors typically do not know the current street prices of illegal drugs. Grounsell’s valuation of the drugs, based on his years of law enforcement experience, allowed the jury to better determine whether a person would reasonably leave expensive narcotics unguarded and disguised as trash in a truck allegedly used by numerous people. If the jury did not believe Jamison’s assertion that an unknown individual left thousands of dollars worth of drugs disguised as .App.1998) (<HOLDING>); State v. McCoy, 105 N.C.App. 686, 414 S.E.2d

A: holding an agent from the drug enforcement agency could testify regarding the street value of cocaine where the agent was testifying regarding matters within his personal knowledge and experience as a narcotics officer
B: holding that expert testimony of irs agent regarding tax liability did not usurp the function of the jury as agent did not give her opinion about the guilt of the defendant
C: holding that plea agreement with drug enforcement agency agent not enforceable when agent was not authorized by united states attorney to enter agreement
D: holding officer could testify based on his training and experience that a defendants actions were consistent with selling cocaine
A.