Alvarado, Jesse Dimas, PD-1292-15

Jesse Dimas Alvarado, a convicted felon (sexual assault of a child; adjudicated 2003, released 2011), was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm under Tex. Penal Code §46.04(a)(1) after a December 5, 2013 search of his family home.
Search executed in connection with a child‑pornography investigation targeting Alvarado’s brother Alfred; Alvarado was asleep in a bedroom when officers entered.
Officers found a 9mm pistol on a closet shelf in the bedroom where Alvarado slept; Alvarado told officers the room was his and his wallet/ID and offender card were found there; Alfred testified he had bought the gun and previously used the room.
The State introduced photographs and various prison/business records showing Alvarado’s prior conviction(s) and prison misconduct; defense did not object at trial to portions of documentary evidence that contained prejudicial extraneous‑acts material.
Jury convicted; trial court assessed five years’ imprisonment. The First Court of Appeals affirmed, rejecting insufficiency and ineffective‑assistance claims.

Issue	Appellant's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence linking Alvarado to firearm	Evidence failed to affirmatively link gun to Alvarado; gun could have belonged to brother Alfred	Circumstantial and direct links (room occupancy, Alvarado’s ID and clothes in room, gun in plain view, proximity) suffice	Affirmed: cumulative links permitted a rational trier of fact to find possession beyond a reasonable doubt
Ineffective assistance for failure to object to prejudicial extraneous‑acts material	Trial counsel unreasonably failed to preserve or object to highly prejudicial prison/prior‑offense entries; claim can be raised on direct appeal because no reasonable strategy explains omission	Record silent as to counsel’s reasons; counsel may have declined to object to avoid drawing attention to documents—presumed reasonable strategy	Denied on direct appeal: appellant failed to overcome presumption of reasonable strategy and failed to show prejudice under Strickland

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two‑prong test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence under due process)
Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (appellate sufficiency standard articulated for Texas criminal cases)
Poindexter v. State, 153 S.W.3d 402 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (discusses required independent links when contraband not on person/exclusive control)
Ex parte Menchaca, 854 S.W.2d 128 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) (circumstances where ineffective‑assistance claim may be addressed on direct appeal)