Sherman Ray Gillespie v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 23, 2025
• Docket: 10-25-00040-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Court of Appeals Tenth Appellate District of Texas

10-25-00040-CR

Sherman Ray Gillespie, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

On appeal from the 278th District Court of Walker County, Texas Judge Hal R. Ridley, presiding Trial Court Cause No. 28097

JUSTICE HARRIS delivered the opinion of the Court.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Sherman Ray Gillespie was convicted of Sexual Assault of a Child and

sentenced to 12 years and six months in prison. We affirm.

In his first issue, Gillespie contends the trial court denied his Sixth

Amendment right to confrontation by denying Gillespie the ability to question

the victim, T.W., about the details of a past sexual incident. Gillespie did not

object based on a violation of his right of confrontation; thus his Confrontation Clause argument, and this issue, is not preserved for review. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 33.1(a); Davis v. State, 313 S.W.3d 317, 347 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010)

(Confrontation Clause claims subject to preservation requirement); Anderson

v. State, 301 S.W.3d 276, 280 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). Accordingly, Gillespie’s

first issue is overruled.

Next, Gillespie asserts the trial court erred in denying Gillespie’s motion

for mistrial. Gillespie cites no authority to support his assertion. Accordingly,

this issue is improperly briefed and presents nothing for review. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 38.1(i); Lucio v. State, 351 S.W.3d 878, 896 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011); see

also Neville v. State, 622 S.W.3d 99, 104 (Tex. App.—Waco 2020, no pet.).

Gillespie’s second issue is overruled.

Having overruled each issue on appeal, we affirm the trial court’s

judgment.

LEE HARRIS Justice

OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: October 23, 2025 Before Chief Justice Johnson, Justice Smith, and Justice Harris Affirmed Do Not Publish CR25

Gillespie v. State Page 2