Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Kevin Rogers, Appellant v. The State of Texas, State
OPINION
After Appellant Kevin Rogers pled guilty to one count of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, the trial court found him guilty and sentenced him to twenty-five years' confinement. In one issue, Appellant contends that the trial court abused its discretion and assessed a cruel and unusual punishment by sentencing him to twenty-five years' confinement. We note that the sentence is well within the range of punishment Appellant faced—confinement for five to ninety-nine years or life plus a fine of up to $10,000.1 Appellant did not complain of the sentence in the trial court, and the State argues that he did not preserve his complaint for appeal. We agree.
Appellant had ample opportunity to complain of the sentence in the trial court because the careful trial judge first stated, “I'm going to assess your punishment at 25 years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice,” and then immediately gave Appellant a chance to allocute, asking, “Any legal reason why I shouldn't sentence him?” 2 Appellant's counsel answered, “No lawful reason, Your Honor.” The trial court then pronounced the sentence. Appellant filed no motion for new trial after the sentence was imposed. Because Appellant did not raise his sentencing complaint before the trial court despite the opportunity, he forfeited his complaint.3
We overrule Appellant's sole issue and affirm the trial court's judgment.
FOOTNOTES
1. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 12.32, 29.03(b) (West 2011).
2. See Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.07 (West 2006).
3. See Ziegler v. State, No. 02–14–00315–CR, 2015 WL 4077040, at *1 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth July 2, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication); Alford v. State, No. 02–13–00058–CR, 2014 WL 3398187, at *5 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth July 10, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication); Driggers v. State, Nos. 02–13–00123–CR, 02–13–00124–CR, 02–13–00125–CR, 2014 WL 2619379, at *1 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth June 12, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
LEE ANN DAUPHINOT, JUSTICE
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: NO. 02-14-00499-CR
Decided: April 07, 2016
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Fort Worth.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)