With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". was legally and factually sufficient to establish that the property was contraband and that the seizure was valid. See City of Keller, 168 S.W.3d at 827; Garza, 395 S.W.2d at 823. Accordingly we overrule appellant’s thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth issues. VIII. Conclusion Having overruled appellant’s fifteen issues, we affirm the trial court’s judgment. 1 . The property is located within one thousand feet of Cunningham Elementary School. See Tex Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.134(b)(1) (Vernon Supp.2006). 2 . The original search and arrest warrant established the proof necessary to issue the subsequent seizure warrant for the seizure of the real property in compliance with article 59.03. See State v. Anderson, 917 S.W.2d 92, 99-100 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1996, pet. refd) (<HOLDING>). 3 . An ex post facto law (1) punishes as a

A: holding that a visual body cavity search requires probable cause and a search warrant
B: holding that a search warrant is invalid if not based on an affidavit
C: holding that personal knowledge gained by a police officer from a previous search may establish probable cause necessary for second search warrant if affidavit sets forth sufficient underlying facts
D: holding that there was probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant where the officers corroboration of events that occurred during the controlled buy as set forth in the affidavit provide sufficient probable cause
C.