In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-19-00062-CR

ELKIN MARTINEZ-CORNELIO, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 Smith County, Texas Trial Court No. 001-80115-19

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Burgess MEMORANDUM OPINION After the trial court overruled his suppression motion, Elkin Martinez-Cornelio pled guilty to and was convicted of possession of a useable quantity of marihuana in an amount less than two ounces. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.121(b)(1). Pursuant to the terms of his plea bargain, Martinez-Cornelio was sentenced to eighty-five days’ confinement in county jail.1 Martinez-Cornelio appeals. 2 In companion case number 06-19-00061-CR, Martinez-Cornelio also appeals his conviction for possession of less than twenty-eight grams of alprazolam, a penalty group 3 controlled substance. Martinez-Cornelio has filed a single brief in which he raises an issue common to both of his appeals. He argues that the trial court erred in overruling his motion to suppress the evidence obtained as a result of an allegedly illegal search.

We addressed this issue in detail in our opinion of this date in cause number 06-19-00061- CR. For the reasons stated therein, we likewise conclude that the trial court’s denial of Martinez- Cornelio’s suppression motion was proper in this case.

The trial court certified that Martinez-Cornelio had the right to appeal the ruling on his motion to suppress.

Originally appealed to the Twelfth Court of Appeals, this case was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001. We follow the precedent of the Twelfth Court of Appeals in deciding this case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 41.3.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Ralph K. Burgess Justice Date Submitted: October 3, 2019 Date Decided: October 4, 2019 Do Not Publish