eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2012-11

Cordarius Leon Gillis v. State ( 2012 )


Menu:
 
  •                                         In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-12-00232-CR
____________________
CORDARIUS LEON GILLIS, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
_______________________________________________________               ______________
On Appeal from the 252nd District Court
Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 11-10871
________________________________________________________               _____________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Cordarius Leon Gillis pleaded guilty under a plea bargain to possession of a
weapon in a prohibited place. The trial court deferred adjudication of guilt and placed
Gillis on community supervision. The State filed a motion to revoke, and Gillis pleaded
“true” to two violations of his community supervision. The trial court revoked the
community supervision and sentenced Gillis to ten years in prison. He appeals from the
revocation.
Gillis argues the ten-year sentence is constitutionally disproportionate and
unreasonable under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and article I,
1
section 13 of the Texas Constitution. He does not argue that the relevant state
constitutional provision is broader or offers greater protection than the Eighth
Amendment. See Baldridge v. State,
    77 S.W.3d 890
    , 894 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th
Dist.] 2002, pet. ref‟d).
The Eighth Amendment provides that “[e]xcessive bail shall not be required, nor
excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” U.S. Const.
amend. VIII. “Subject only to a very limited, „exceedingly rare,‟ and somewhat
amorphous Eighth Amendment gross-disproportionality review, a punishment that falls
within the legislatively prescribed range, and that is based upon the sentencer‟s informed
normative judgment, is unassailable on appeal.” Ex parte Chavez,
    213 S.W.3d 320
    , 323-
24 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (footnote omitted). The sentence was within the statutory
range of not less than two or more than ten years in prison. See
    Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 12.34
    , 46.03 (West 2011). The record contains no evidence of disproportionality between
sentences imposed in this jurisdiction and any other jurisdictions for a similar offense.
See Fluellen v. State,
    71 S.W.3d 870
    , 873 (Tex. App.—2002, pet. ref‟d).
Gillis did not object when the trial court sentenced him to ten years in prison, nor
did he file a motion for new trial challenging the punishment assessed. The issue is not
preserved for our review. Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a); Mercado v. State,
    718 S.W.2d 291
    ,
296 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error
pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such
2
error in the trial court.”); Trevino v. State,
    174 S.W.3d 925
    , 927-28 (Tex. App.—Corpus
Christi 2005, pet. ref‟d).
Gillis states that the evidence was insufficient to revoke his community
supervision and to adjudicate guilt, but he offers no argument on the issue. See Tex. R.
App. P. 38.1(i). Gillis further asserts that the trial court considered matters not presented
in evidence. He does not point to the specific evidence he is referring to and there was no
objection made at the revocation hearing. See Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a).
We overrule Gillis‟s issues and affirm the conviction.
AFFIRMED.
________________________________
DAVID GAULTNEY
Justice
Submitted on October 29, 2012
Opinion Delivered November 7, 2012
Do Not Publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.
3