← Case library
5th DCAMay 8, 2026Reversed and Remanded⭐ Notable

Munnerlyn v. State

Case No. 5D2025-1102

The Fifth District reversed a conviction for possession of over 20 grams of cannabis with intent to sell, holding that a police officer's testimony about how sandwich bags are 'typically' used by drug dealers to package substances for sale was inadmissible 'general criminal behavior' evidence under Baskin and Armalin. The court held that defense counsel's simple 'speculation' objection was sufficient to preserve the issue, and that the State failed to prove the error was harmless because there was no direct evidence of intent to sell and the State relied heavily on the testimony in opening and closing. Judge Makar dissented, finding the testimony properly admitted as expert opinion under Brooks and Scarlett, and any error harmless given the scale, cash, and quantity of marijuana.

Key facts

  • Munnerlyn was convicted in trial court of possession of over 20 grams of cannabis with intent to sell.
  • A police officer testified that sandwich bags are 'typically' used by drug dealers to package substances for sale, and the State emphasized this testimony in opening and closing statements.
  • +2 more key facts with a free trial

Why it matters

This opinion gives criminal defense practitioners a workable precedent for preserving objections to officer 'drug dealer practice' testimony without needing to recite precise evidentiary code sections, lowering the bar… — full analysis with a trial

🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library

The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.

Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.

Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.