speed

                                         4
pursuit of appellant, his arrest, and the investigation of the robberies. The State

also introduced the testimony of a street gang expert, who concluded appellant was

a member of a gang. The expert reached this conclusion based on appellant’s

tattoos and on his association with known gang members.

      The jury also heard evidence that appellant had committed the robberies

while he was on community supervision for the offense of possession of a

controlled substance.     Appellant also had a previous conviction for the

misdemeanor offenseof evading arrest.

      Appellant offered the testimony of his sister, his fiancée, and his father.

They each testified that appellant had become more mature in the nearly two years

since he had committed the offenses. They requested that appellant be placed on

community supervision. They asserted that this would permit appellant to be a

father to his two-year-old daughter and to help his father who had suffered a series

of strokes. During closing argument, in addition to emphasizing the testimony of

these witnesses, defense counsel requested the jury to take into consideration that

appellant was only 18 years old when he committed the robberies.

      During its closing argument, the State emphasized the nature of the crimes,

the high speed chase that followed, and the fact that