establish a felony offense -and it establishes only a suspicion that narcotics were in or around the bag—the presence of narcotics would need to be verified through further testing. The State did not conduct further testing of the bag or the money.- The handler further conceded that Enriquez’s bag could have been next to. another bag that had- narcotics in it, such as another bag in the overhead bin in the bus. Also, despite the State’s assertion to the contrary, the record does not indicate whether the money; was in the bag when Diego alerted to it. Diego did not alert on the money, and there is no evidence of when or where the bag would have come into contact with illegal substances. See $136,205.00 (Johnson) v. State, 848 S.W.2d 888, 891 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1993, no writ) (<HOLDING>). The relevance of a dog alert in the
holding that the receipt by the deputy clerk of  complaints in his post office box in the early morning hours of saturday august 23 constituted a sufficient filing of these suits prior to midnight of the following day notwithstanding the fact that the clerk did not open the box until 830 am on monday august 25 holding that circumstance that contraband was found in a box bearing defendants name was sufficient to support an inference of knowledge and dominion and control holding jurys finding that money in bank safe deposit box was contraband was not supported by factually sufficient evidence when safety deposit box was located a distance away from marijuana despite fact that canine alerted to safety deposit box holding defendants possession of forged checks was sufficient to allow inference of his intent to deposit them holding that a defendant may not be charged with two separate offenses premised on two amounts of cocaine one found in a box and one found in a bag located in the passenger compartment of the defendants vehicle