1 ... S eeT EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 4. 2 ... S eeT e x . P e n a l C o d e A n n . § § 1 2 .3 3 , 2 9 .0 2 (a )(2 ) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 3 ).



## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH NO . 2- 07-433- CR
ANT HON Y D. W AS HI NGT ON AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 213TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F TARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- A ppe l l antA nt honyD . W as hi ngt on a ppe al s hi s t w el ve- yea rs ent enc e f or r obbe r y. 2We a f f i r m. I n a n ope n pl ea t o t he t r i al co urt , a p p e l l antpl ea ded gui l t y t o r obbe r y. A fter he a ri n g ev i d e n c e an d arg u m e n t, the tr i a l co u rtse n t e n c e d ap p e l l a n t t o3 ... T EX . R. A PP . P. 21. 6 ( pr ovi di ng ge ner al l y t hatde f end antm us tpr es ent

m o ti o n fo r n e w tri a l to tri a l c o u r t w i th i n te n d a y s o f i ts fi l i n g ); Thomps on v. S tate , 2 4 3 S .W .3 d 7 7 4 , 7 7 5

– 7 6 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 7 , p e t. re f’d ); Craw fo rd v. S tate , N o . 0 2 -0 4 -0 0 2 9 9 -C R , 2 0 0 5 W L1 4 7 7 9 5 8 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W ort h Jun e 23 , 20 05 , pet . r ef ’ d) ( not desi gnated f orpubl i cat i on) ( hol di ng t hat d i s p ro p o r t i o n a te s e n te n c e c l a i m m u s t b e p re s e rv e d fo r a p p e l l a te re v i e w ); see Ca rra nza v. S tate , 96 0 S . W . 2d 76 , 7 8 (T e x . C r i m . A pp. 19 98 ) ( hol di ng t hat a p p e l l a n t h a d b u rde n n o t on l yto fi l e m o ti o n for n e w tr i a l , b u t al so to “ p res e n t” i t to th e tri a l c o u rt).

4 ... Carranza , 960 S. W . 2d a t79. 5 ... S eeT EX . R. A PP . P. 2 1 .6 ; Carranza , 9 6 0 S .W .2 d a t 7 9 . 2 t w el ve yea r s’ co nf i nem enti n t he I ns t i t ut i ona l D i vi si on oft he Texa s D epa rt m ent o f C ri m i n a l J u s ti c e . I n hi s sol e poi nton appeal , appel l ant contends t hatt he t r i al courtabused i t s di sc r et i on i n s ent enc i ng h i m t o t w el ve yea r s’ co nf i nem entbe ca us e t he s e n te n c e w a s d i s p ro p o rti o n a te to th e c ri m e c o m m i tte d . A l th o u g h ap p e l l a n t t i m e l yfi l e d a m o ti o n for n e w tr i a l , h e h a s fa i l e d to pr eserve hi s com pl ai nt because t he r ecor d does not i ndi cat e t hathe pr esent ed h i s m o ti o n for n e w tr i a l to th e tr i a l co u rt . 3The t er m “ pr es ent ” m ea ns t he
r ec or d m us ts how t hatt he m ova ntf ora new t r i al s us t a i n e d th e bur den of ac t ual l y de l i ver i ng t he m ot i on f orne w t r i al t o t he att ent i on orac t ual not i ceof th e tr i a l co u rt . 4H e r e , t h e re c o r d e s t a b l is h e s t h a tA p p e lla n tt im e lyf ile d h is
m ot i on f orne w t r i al , buti tdoe s nots how t hathe a c tu a l l y d el i ver ed i tt o t he t r i al co urtorot her w i se br ought i tt o t he t r i al co urt ’ s att ent i on. 5Accor di ngl y,3

because appel l antdi d not pr eserve hi s cl ai m r egar di ng t he al l eged d i s p ro p o rti o n a te s e n te n c i n g , w e o v e rru l e h i s s o l e p o i n t. T h e tri a l c o u rt’s j udgm enti s af f i r m ed. P E R CU R I AM PA N EL: CA YC E, C. J. ; LI V I N G STO N an d DA U PH I N O T, JJ. PUBL I SH DEL I VERE D: Aug us t29, 2008