Rule 701 of the Federal Rules. As of this entry, some 28 states have adopted Federal Rule 701 without change. See Weinstein, supra, ¶ 701[03]. 4 . United States v. Langford, 802 F.2d 1176, 1178-79 (9th Cir.1986) (admitting identification testimony with respect to persons depicted in a bank surveillance photograph), cert. denied, 483 U.S. 1008, 107 S.Ct. 3235, 97 L.Ed.2d 740 (1987); United States v. Allen, 787 F.2d 933, 935-37 (4th Cir.1986) (same), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 944, 109 S.Ct. 371, 102 L.Ed.2d 360 (1988); United States v. Farnsworth, 729 F.2d 1158, 1160-61 (8th Cir.1984) (same); United States v. Jackson, 688 F.2d 1121, 1125 (7th Cir.1982) (same), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1043, 103 S.Ct. 1441, 75 L.Ed.2d 797 (1983). 5 . United States v. Carlock, 806 F.2d 535, 552 (5th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 949, 950, 107 S.Ct.
recognizing that a common illustration of an admissible opinion under rule 701 is an expression of opinion by a lay observer of a cars speed recognizing that an advisory opinion is one that offers an opinion on a moot issue holding that lay opinion testimony is not admissible when the jury can readily draw the necessary inferences and conclusions without the aid of the opinion holding that lay witness opinion as to guilt of defendant inadmissible holding officers testimony about the common use of vise grips to assist in stealing cars was admissible opinion testimony by a lay witness