that defendant had attained the status of an habitual felon. Defendant was sentenced to 130 to 165 months’ imprisonment. He appeals. _ On appeal, defendant contends the trial court committed plain error when it admitted Charlesworth’s report into evidence and allowed Officer Tucker to testify as to the results of Charlesworth’s chemical analysis, and permitted Officer Tucker to testify that the substance he found in defendant’s jacket was cocaine. We agree and conclude defendant is entitled to a new trial. Defendant challenges the admission of the chemical analysis report that was prepared by Anne Charlesworth and testified about by Officer Tucker at trial on the basis that his Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause rights were violated. The report summarized testing done by Ms. 305, 309 (<HOLDING>), disc. review denied, 364 N.C. 245, 669 S.E.2d
holding that va regulations do not provide that service connection can only be shown through medical records but rather allow for proof through lay evidence and that lay evidence may serve to place evidence in equipoise holding that aet an antidepressant having similar chemical structures to schedule i controlled substances could be a controlled substance analogue only if it met both the chemical structure and the pharmacological effect prongs of statute ie i and ii or i and iii holding that controlled substances defined by their chemical composition can only be identified through chemical analysis and not through visual inspection recognizing that a vested equitable estate can be passed through inheritance holding that an invalid charge can be perfected through equitable tolling