1

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, 
2

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 
3

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.