A defendant was facing several charges related to armed robbery and murder. In correspondence on social media with his alleged co-conspirators, the defendant used the slang terms “lick” and “sweet lick.”1 The state called the investigating law enforcement officer as a lay witness, asking the officer to define the two terms. The defendant objected and claimed the state was improperly attempting to admit an expert opinion. The judge overruled the objection. The officer proceeded, testifying that based on his experience in the robbery unit of the police department, the term “lick” meant robbery and the term “sweet lick” meant an easy robbery or someone easy to rob. The jury convicted the defendant.