Opinion ID: 1913160
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: was heftel's sentence excessive and disproportionate?

Text: A review of the record from the lower court shows no objection to the sentence was made during Heftel's sentencing hearing nor was any data presented to support his claim of disproportionality. We have repeatedly declared: This court has stated on numerous occasions that an issue not presented at the trial level will not be reviewed at the appellate level. The trial court must be given an opportunity to correct any claimed error before we will review it on appeal. State v. Holt, 334 N.W.2d 47 (S.D.1983); State v. O'Connor, 265 N.W.2d 709 (S.D. 1978). Appellant did not at any time prior to this appeal raise a claim that his sentence was improper or illegal. Therefore, appellant's claim concerning his original sentence is not properly before this court. State v. Holter, 340 N.W.2d 691, 692 (S.D. 1983); State v. Sheridan, 383 N.W.2d 865 (S.D.1986); SDCL 23A-32-14. Additionally, where no information concerning proportionality has been presented to the trial court, this court will not accept an invitation to second guess the trial court on its sentence. State v. Holloway, 482 N.W.2d 306, 311 (S.D. 1992). Heftel's failure to object to his sentence or raise a claim it was improper at the trial court level has resulted in waiver of this issue for appeal.