Dylan John Hart v. the State of Texas ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                                       IN THE
    TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
    No. 10-20-00062-CR
    DYLAN JOHN HART,
    Appellant
    v.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS,
    Appellee
    From the 52nd District Court
    Coryell County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 19-25560
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Dylan John Hart was convicted of sexual assault of a child younger than seventeen
    and sentenced to 10 years in prison. See TEX. PENAL CODE §22.011 (a)(2). Because Hart’s
    issue is not preserved, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.
    In his sole issue on appeal, Hart contends the trial court erred in allowing the State
    to present evidence of Hart’s character during the guilt/innocence phase of the trial in
    violation of Texas Rule of Evidence 404(b)(1),(2). 1 Hart failed to object on this basis in the
    1
    The testimony at issue centered around an incident where Hart brought a young man, not the victim in
    the underlying case, to a bar and a friend of Hart’s told Hart that the young man was in high school and
    warned Hart about “hanging out with a kid, especially in a bar.”
    trial court. Rather, at trial, Hart objected to the testimony as being inherently prejudicial,
    a Rule 403 objection. TEX. R. EVID. 403 (“The court may exclude relevant evidence if its
    probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following:
    unfair prejudice….”). In his brief, although Hart mentions Rule 403, he concluded his
    argument by specifically maintaining that the testimony “concerning [Hart] and the
    young man in the bar went only to [Hart’s] character and did not ma[ke] more probable
    that he committed the offense for which he was on trial[,]” a mixture of Rules 404(b) and
    401. TEX. R. EVID. 404(b); 401.
    Accordingly, Hart’s argument on appeal does not comport with the objection
    made at trial, and this issue is not preserved for our review. See Lovill v. State, 
    319 S.W.3d 687
    , 691-92 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); Pena v. State, 
    285 S.W.3d 459
    , 464 (Tex. Crim. App.
    2009).
    Hart’s sole issue is overruled and the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.
    TOM GRAY
    Chief Justice
    Before Chief Justice Gray,
    Justice Johnson, and
    Justice Smith
    Affirmed
    Opinion delivered and filed February 23, 2022
    Do not publish
    [CR25]
    Hart v. State                                                                           Page 2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-20-00062-CR

Filed Date: 2/23/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/25/2022