People v. Alsup 

Defendant was convicted, after bench trial, of two counts of possession of controlled substances with intent to deliver. Defendant failed to establish that "rare" case where a "complete breakdown" in the chain of custody occurred such that he would be permitted to challenge the discrepancy for the first time on appeal; the police officer's description of the chain of custody, combined with the stipulated testimony of forensic scientist from ISP Crime Lab, negated the Defendant's argument, and the State satisfied its prima facie case. A chain of custody challenge is an attack on the admissibility of the evidence, and is thus subject to the ordinary rules of forfeiture. Thus, the waiver rule bars Defendant from raising, for the first time on apeal, a challenge to the discrepancy in the oral recitation of the stipulation; police officer testified that he had recovered five packets of heroin, but oral recitation stated that forensic scientist had tested nine packets of heroin. (KILBRIDE, FREEMAN, THOMAS, GARMAN, KARMEIER, and BURKE, concurring.)