Mayes v. State

Mayes appeals from a conviction- of heroin possession. We affirm the judgment.

Mayes presents the following contentions for our determination :

1. The trial court lacked jurisdiction in that Mayes was not prosecuted, as required by Indiana Rules of Procedure, CR. 4(C), within one year after the filing of the affidavit charging him.

2. The trial court erred in admitting hearsay testimony.

*1893. A witness was permitted to give expert testimony without proper foundation as to his qualifications.

4. Chain of custody of the drug admitted into evidence was not established.

5. The trial court erred in…