Carlos Bush v. State ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •   

















    In The

    Court of Appeals

    Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana



    ______________________________



    No. 06-08-00072-CR

    ______________________________





    CARLOS BUSH, Appellant



    V.



    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee






    On Appeal from the 124th Judicial District Court

    Gregg County, Texas

    Trial Court No. 35053-B










    Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

    Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley



    MEMORANDUM OPINION



    Carlos Bush has appealed from his open plea of guilty to the offense of burglary of a habitation. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 30.02(c)(2) (Vernon 2003). He was sentenced by the trial court to five years' imprisonment. (1)

    On appeal, Bush contends that his sentence is disproportionate to the crime, citing Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277 (1983), and Davis v. State, 905 S.W.2d 655 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 1995, pet. ref'd). To preserve such complaint for appellate review, Bush must have presented to the trial court a timely request, objection, or motion that stated the specific grounds for the desired ruling, or the complaint must be apparent from the context. See Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a)(1); Harrison v. State, 187 S.W.3d 429, 433 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Williams v. State, 191 S.W.3d 242, 262 (Tex. App.--Austin 2006, no pet.) (claims of cruel and unusual punishment must be presented in timely manner); Nicholas v. State, 56 S.W.3d 760, 768 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, pet. ref'd) (failure to complain to trial court that sentences were cruel and unusual waived claim of error for appellate review). We have reviewed the record of the trial proceeding. No relevant request, objection, or motion was made. Although this Court has held that a motion for new trial is an appropriate way to preserve this type of claim for review (see Williamson v. State, 175 S.W.3d 522, 523-24 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2005, no pet.); Delacruz v. State, 167 S.W.3d 904 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2005, no pet.)), Bush did not file a motion for new trial. He has not preserved such an issue for appeal.

    Therefore, we affirm the trial court's judgment.





    Bailey C. Moseley

    Justice



    Date Submitted: June 18, 2008

    Date Decided: June 19, 2008



    Do Not Publish

    1. Bush's sentence was imposed April 12, 2007; his notice of appeal was untimely filed, and this Court dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction July 31, 2007. Thereafter, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted Bush an out-of-time appeal. Its mandate issued February 19, 2008, and Bush filed his notice of appeal February 29, 2008, within the thirty-day time limit after issuance of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals mandate.

      

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

                                                             In The

                                                    Court of Appeals

                            Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

     

                                                    ______________________________

     

                                                                 No. 06-11-00057-CV

                                                    ______________________________

     

     

     

                     IN THE INTEREST OF A.P., G.P., AND L.P., CHILDREN

     

     

     

     

                                           On Appeal from the 336th Judicial District Court

                                                                 Fannin County, Texas

                                                           Trial Court No. FA-10-39888

     

                                                   

     

     

                                              Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

                                                Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley


                                                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

     

                Bonnie Ruth Allen-Pieroni, the sole appellant in this case, has filed a motion seeking to dismiss her appeal, stating that the trial court has granted a new trial in this matter. Pursuant to Rule 42.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, her motion is granted.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.1.

                We dismiss the appeal.

     

                                                                            Bailey C. Moseley

                                                                            Justice

     

    Date Submitted:          November 1, 2011

    Date Decided:             November 2, 2011