Rule 105 of the rules of evidence, which provides: (a) Limiting Instruction. When evidence which is admissible as to one party or for one purpose but not admissible as to another party or for another purpose is admitted, the court, upon request, shall restrict the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly; but, in the absence of such request the court's action in admitting such evidence without limitation shall not be a ground for complaint on appeal. See TEX. R. EVID. 105. Assuming, without deciding, that appellant preserved this issue for review, we conclude any error by the trial court in not giving a limiting instruction to the jury concerning the criminal activities and reputation of the Los Home Boys gang does not warrant reversal. Failure to give a limiting instruction when properly requested is analyzed under rule 44.2(b) of the rules of appellate procedure. Rankin v. State, 995 S.W.2d 210, 215 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1999, pet. ref'd). Under that rule, we may reverse a trial court's decision only when a defendant's substantial right has been affected. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.2(b) a substantial right is affected when the error had a substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict. Mendiola v. State, 995 S.W.2d 175, 183 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1999, pet. granted). If we, as an appellate court, have a fair assurance the error had but a slight effect on the jury's verdict after reviewing the entire record, we should not overturn the jury's decision. Rankin, 995 S.W.2d at 215.