In Carr v. State, No. 06-99-00156-CR, 2000 WL 1160686 (Tex. App.--Texarkana Aug. 17, 2000, pet. ref'd), in evaluating a claim for ineffective assistance, the Texarkana Court of Appeals considered the defendant's counsel's failure to object to the State's argument that the defendant was a "big fish" in the local narcotics scene. The court concluded that the State's "big fish" argument and the State's comparison of the culpability of a drug dealer versus a drug user was improper because the defendant "was on trial for possession of cocaine and not for selling it, and for the further reason that there is nothing in the record from which any inference could be drawn that the defendant was a major player on the local drug scene." Id.