Ventura, Carlos Alberto v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 13, 2003
• Docket: 14-02-00524-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 13, 2003

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 13, 2003.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-02-00524-CR

CARLOS ALBERTO VENTURA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

___________________________________________

On Appeal from the 185th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 884,480

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

            A jury found appellant, a citizen of El Salvador, guilty of aggravated robbery and sentenced him to fifteen years’ confinement. 

            Appellant contends in one point of error that the trial court erred in allowing the State’s argument against probation.  Specifically, the State argued that because appellant is not a United States citizen, he could be deported for his crime before complying with conditions of probation.  Thus, the State argued that probation was not punishment at all.  Appellant contends that this argument, during the punishment phase of the trial, was improper and caused substantial harm.  We affirm.

Waiver of Appellate Review

            “In order to preserve jury argument error for appellate review, the defendant must: ‘(1) make an objection; (2) request an instruction to disregard; and (3) make a motion for a mistrial.’”  Cook v. State, 858 S.W.2d 467, 473 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) (quoting Coe v. State, 683 S.W.2d 431, 436 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984)).  In the instant case, appellant failed to fulfill any of these requirements, as he acknowledges in his brief.  By failing to object and to procure a ruling, the appellant presents nothing for this court to review.  Tex. R. App. P. 33.1; Reynolds v. State, 848 S.W.2d 785, 790 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1993, pet. ref’d) (stating that an “[a]ppellant failed to preserve error by failing to procure a ruling and by failing to request a mistrial.”).  Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. 

                                                                        /s/        Charles W. Seymore

                                                                                    Justice

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed February 13, 2003.

Panel consists of Justices Anderson, Seymore, and Guzman.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).