“It Looks Like Cocaine”: Why Visual Guesses Don’t Count in Court

By: John Guidry

Weighing stuff is pretty simple, right? Just put it on a scale, watch for a number, and bam—you’ve got a weight.

When it comes to weighing drugs in a trafficking case, it’s not so simple. Everyone has watched CSI and been dazzled by the high-tech gadgets actors use to find evidence. Unfortunately, real life is not as high-tech. Real-life government crime fighters are not always as thorough as their showbiz counterparts.

Our real-life drama comes from the case of Jackson v. State, 76 So. 3d 1130 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012).

Did the lab only test one of your baggies and guess the rest?

Guessing isn’t science. Call John today at (407) 423-1117.

The Case: Jackson v. State (The Lazy Lab Test)

Jackson was convicted of Trafficking in Cocaine (200 to 400 grams).

• The Penalty: This carries a Minimum Mandatory 7 years in prison and a $100,000 fine.
• The Sentence: The judge gave Jackson 15 years.

The Evidence: Police found eight baggies of white powder.

• The Test: The lab analyst testified that she only chemically tested one of the eight baggies.
• The Assumption: She testified that the other seven “appeared” to contain the same drug, so she added their weight to the total.
• The Confession: Jackson even admitted to police that he usually buys a “quarter kilogram” (250 grams) every two weeks.

The Ruling: Visual Inspection is Junk Science

Despite the confession and the visual similarity, the Appeals Court overturned the conviction. They relied on previous rulings (Ross v. State) that “visual examination” of white powder is insufficient.

Why?

“The white powder contained therein may be milk sugar or any one of a vast variety of other white powdery chemical compounds not containing cocaine.”

Just because one baggie had cocaine doesn’t mean the other seven did. Dealers cut their product all the time. The State cannot just “look” at a powder and send you to prison for 15 years. The Result: The court reduced the charge to the weight of the one tested baggie (28 to 200 grams). This dropped the mandatory sentence from 7 years down to 3 years. (3 years sure beats 15 years).

John’s 2026 Update: The Counterfeit Pill Crisis

Note: In 2012, the court was hesitant to force the State to test every pill (like Oxycodone) because markings were considered reliable. In 2026, that logic is dangerous.

1. The “Counterfeit Pill” Defense In the past, if a pill was stamped “Watson 540,” the court assumed it was Hydrocodone.

• The Reality Today: The streets are flooded with Pressed Fentanyl Pills that look identical to Oxycodone or Xanax but contain lethal Fentanyl.
• The Argument: We argue that “Visual Inspection” of pills is now just as unreliable as white powder. If the State charges you with “Trafficking in Oxycodone” based on markings, but the pills are actually fake (containing Fentanyl), the charge is chemically wrong. We force them to test the pills to prove what they actually are.

2. Fentanyl Thresholds (4 Grams) The margin for error in 2026 is razor-thin.

• Trafficking starts at just 4 grams.
• If the lab tests one pill and estimates the weight of the rest, a rounding error of 0.5 grams can trigger a 25-year mandatory sentence. We demand precision weighing on calibrated digital scales, not estimates.

3. “Representative Sampling” is Unconstitutional Labs are backed up, so they try to test 5 pills out of 100 and say it’s a “Representative Sample.”

• Our Defense: In a Trafficking case, every gram counts. If 50 of those pills were just Tylenol (fillers), you shouldn’t be sentenced for them. We file motions to force the State to test every single unit included in the trafficking weight.

Don’t Let Them “Estimate” Your Freedom

If the State is too lazy to test the evidence, they shouldn’t be allowed to lock you up for it. Precision matters.

Call me at (407) 423-1117. Let’s weigh the evidence properly.

About John Guidry II

John Guidry II is a seasoned criminal defense attorney and founder of the Law Firm of John P. Guidry II, P.A., located in downtown Orlando next to the Orange County Courthouse, where he has practiced for over 30 years. With more than three decades of experience defending clients throughout Central Florida since 1993, Guidry has successfully defended thousands of cases in Orange, Seminole, Osceola, Brevard, Lake, and Volusia counties. He has built a reputation for his strategic approach to criminal defense, focusing on pretrial motions and case dismissals rather than jury trials.

Guidry earned both his Juris Doctorate and Master of Business Administration from St. Louis University in 1993. He is a member of the Florida Bar and the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. His practice encompasses the full spectrum of Florida state criminal charges, with a particular emphasis on achieving favorable outcomes through thorough pretrial preparation and motion practice.

Beyond the courtroom, Guidry is a prolific legal educator who has authored over 400 articles on criminal defense topics. He shares his legal expertise through his popular YouTube channel, Instagram, and TikTok accounts, where he has built a substantial following of people eager to learn about the law. His educational content breaks down complex legal concepts into accessible information for the general public.

When not practicing law, Guidry enjoys tennis and pickleball, and loves to travel. Drawing from his background as a former recording studio owner and music video producer in the Orlando area, he brings a creative perspective to his legal practice and continues to apply his passion for video production to his educational content.