Court Opinion

ID: 9406893
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-05 06:07:44.304277+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:33.841836
License: Public Domain

AFFIRMED and Opinion Filed June 30, 2023

                                         In the
                               Court of Appeals
                        Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                  No. 05-22-00792-CR

                       MARK ANTHONY DELESMA, Appellant
                                     V.
                         THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court
                             Dallas County, Texas
                     Trial Court Cause No. F15-54906-M

                            MEMORANDUM OPINION
                       Before Justices Molberg, Carlyle, and Smith
                               Opinion by Justice Carlyle
      Mr. Delesma complains his 10-year-sentence for possession of more than one

but less than four grams of methamphetamine (1) violates the Eighth Amendment’s

prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment; and (2) violates claimed rights

under the “objectives the Texas Penal Code as a whole is supposed to serve and

achieve”; and that the trial court erred by (3) failing to afford him his common law

right to allocution.

      Assuming he preserved his first issue, the sentence is within the punishment

range for the charged offense. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 481.115(c); TEX.

PENAL CODE § 12.34. We conclude it is not grossly disproportionate and passes
constitutional muster. See State v. Simpson, 488 S.W.3d 318, 322 (Tex. Crim. App.

2016).

      Mr. Delesma did not preserve his challenge that the sentence fails to achieve

what he suggests are the objectives of the Texas Penal Code, even in his motion for

new trial. See TEX. R. APP. P. 33.1(a); Zamarron v. State, No. 05-19-00632-CR, 2020

WL 6280869, at *4 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 27, 2020, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not

designated for publication).

      Finally, Mr. Delesma did not preserve a complaint regarding any common law

right to allocution by timely objection at sentencing and had the opportunity to object

at that time. See TEX. R. APP. P. 33.1(a); Loring v. State, No. 05-18-00421-CR, 2019

WL 3282962, at *5 (Tex. App.—Dallas July 22, 2019, no pet.) (mem. op., not

designated for publication).

      We overrule Mr. Delesma’s three issues and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

                                            /Cory L. Carlyle/
220729f.u05                                 CORY L. CARLYLE
Do Not Publish                              JUSTICE
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)

                                         –2–
                            Court of Appeals
                     Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                 JUDGMENT

MARK ANTHONY DELESMA,                        On Appeal from the 194th Judicial
Appellant                                    District Court, Dallas County, Texas
                                             Trial Court Cause No. F15-54906-M.
No. 05-22-00792-CR          V.               Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle.
                                             Justices Molberg and Smith
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee                 participating.

    Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is
AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered this 30th day of June, 2023.

                                       –3–