With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 524 (5th Cir.1974). We take judicial notice of the federal rule. Tex.R.Crim.Evid. 202. In Davis, a Texas state prisoner, serving a life sentence for the primary offense because of (1) a prior federal conviction and (2) a prior state conviction, sought federal habeas corpus relief. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of relief at least as to the use by the State of the prior federal conviction for enhancement purposes, noting the difference between the Texas and federal rules. Davis, 502 F.2d at 524. The applicant, as does the appellant here, had contended that the prior federal conviction was not available for enhancement purposes because it was a federal probated sentence. This claim was rejected. Id.; Cf. United States v. Locke, 542 F.2d 800, 801 (9th Cir.1976) (<HOLDING>). In Ex parte Blume, 618 S.W.2d 373, 376

A: holding the defendant was a convicted felon within the purview of the federal statute prohibiting the receiving and possession of firearms by a convicted felon where the defendants prior conviction was based on an idaho state probated sentence
B: holding that defendant was not entitled to partially suspended sentence as a previously convicted felon
C: holding that dual convictions of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and possession of ammunition by a convicted felon violated double jeopardy
D: holding that the trial court was not entitled to impose a threeyear mandatory minimum sentence on a defendant convicted of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon where the jury verdict did not specifically find actual possession
A.