appellant may not assert error in Texas

2023PENAL CODE § 1.02. –5– “As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.” Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex. Crim.

2018“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.” Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex. Crim.

2015See Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex.Crim.App. 1986)(“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Rhoades v. State, 934 S.W.2d 113, 120 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996)(concluding appellant failed to preserve challenge to sentence under state constitution’s protection against cruel and unusual punishment because he did not object in trial court); Curry v. State, 910 S.W.2d 490, 497 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995)(concluding appellant failed to preserve challenge to sentence under

2014See Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex.Crim.App. 1986)(“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Rhoades v. State, 934 S.W.2d 113, 120 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996)(concluding appellant failed to preserve 2 challenge to sentence under state constitution’s protection against cruel and unusual punishment because he did not object in trial court); Curry v. State, 910 S.W.2d 490, 497 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995)(concluding appellant failed to preserve challenge to sentence und

2010P. 33.1(a)(1); Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex.Crim.App. 1986) ("As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court."); Thompson v. State, 243 S.W.3d 774, 775-76 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2008, pet. ref'd).

2010P. 38.1(a)(1); Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex.Crim.App.1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Thompson v. State, 243 S.W.3d 774, 775-76 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2008, pet. ref'd).

2015See Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex.Crim.App. 1986)(“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Rhoades v. State, 934 S.W.2d 113, 120 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996)(concluding appellant failed to preserve challenge to sentence under state constitution’s protection against cruel and unusual punishment because he did not object in trial court); Curry v. State, 910 S.W.2d 490, 497 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995)(concluding appellant failed to preserve challenge to sentence under

2014See Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex.Crim.App. 1986)(“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Rhoades v. State, 934 S.W.2d 113, 120 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996)(concluding appellant failed to preserve 2 challenge to sentence under state constitution’s protection against cruel and unusual punishment because he did not object in trial court); Curry v. State, 910 S.W.2d 490, 497 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995)(concluding appellant failed to preserve challenge to sentence und

2015See Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex.Crim.App. 1986)(“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Rhoades v. State, 934 S.W.2d 113, 120 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996)(concluding appellant failed to preserve challenge to sentence under state constitution’s protection against cruel and unusual punishment because he did not object in trial court); Curry v. State, 910 S.W.2d 490, 497 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995)(concluding appellant failed to preserve challenge to sentence under

2014See Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex.Crim.App. 1986)(“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Rhoades v. State, 934 S.W.2d 113, 120 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996)(concluding appellant failed to preserve 2 challenge to sentence under state constitution’s protection against cruel and unusual punishment because he did not object in trial court); Curry v. State, 910 S.W.2d 490, 497 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995)(concluding appellant failed to preserve challenge to sentence und

2012App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Laboriel-Guity v. State , 336 S.W.3d 754, 756 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2011, pet. ref’d) (holding that appellant failed to preserve for review his complaint that the trial court abused its discretion by sentencing him to thirty years’ confinement for aggravated robbery when appellant failed to object at sentencing or to file a motion for new trial challenging his sentence’s severity); see also Kim , 283 S.W.3d at

2012App. 1986) (―As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.‖); Laboriel-Guity v. State, 336 S.W.3d 754, 756 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2011, pet. ref’d) (holding that appellant failed to preserve for review his complaint that the trial court abused its discretion by sentencing him to thirty years’ confinement for aggravated robbery when appellant failed to object at sentencing or to file a motion for new trial challenging his sentence’s severity); see also Kim, 283 S.W.3d at 47

2009Thompson v. State , 243 S.W.3d 774, 775 (Tex.App.–Fort Worth 2007, pet. ref’d) (citing Mosley v. State, 983 S.W.2d 249, 265 (Tex.Crim.App. 1998) (op. on reh’g)).

2009Thompson v. State, 243 S.W.3d 774, 775 (Tex.App.–Fort Worth 2007, pet. ref’d) (citing Mosley v. State, 983 S.W.2d 249, 265 (Tex.Crim.App. 1998) (op. on reh’g)).

2020App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Means v. State, 347 S.W.3d 873, 874 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2011, no pet.) (defendant forfeited his complaint he should have been given community supervision instead of eight-year sentence because he did not present that complaint to trial court); Kim v. State, 283 S.W.3d 473, 475 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2009, pet. ref’d) (“Kim’s complaint about the alleged disproportionality of his sentence was not raised at the t

2012App. 1986) (―As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.‖); Laboriel-Guity v. State, 336 S.W.3d 754, 756 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2011, pet. ref’d) (holding that appellant failed to preserve for review his complaint that the trial court abused its discretion by sentencing him to thirty years’ confinement for aggravated robbery when appellant failed to object at sentencing or to file a motion for new trial challenging his sentence’s severity); see also Kim, 283 S.W.3d at 47

2026App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Noland v. State, 264 S.W.3d 144, 151 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, pet. ref’d) (“[I]n order to preserve for appellate review a complaint that a sentence is grossly disproportionate, constituting cruel and unusual punishment, a defendant must present to the trial court a timely request, objection, or motion stating the specific grounds for the ruling desired.”).

2011App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Noland v. State, 264 S.W.3d 144, 151-52 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, pet. ref’d) (holding that appellant failed to preserve his Eighth Amendment complaint because he never made the argument to the trial court); see also Winkfield v. State, No. 10-10-00394- CR, 2011 WL 4490233 , at *1 (Tex. App.—Waco Sept. 28, 2011, no pet. h.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).

2018App. 1986); 3 see Hull v. State, 67 S.W.3d 215, 217 (Tex. Crim.

2009Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex.Crim.App.1986) (en banc); see also Hull v. State, 67 S.W.3d 215, 217-18 (Tex.Crim.App.2002); Harris v. State, 204 S.W.3d 19, 27 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, pet. ref'd). *558 However, an improper cumulation order is considered to be a void sentence, and such error cannot be waived.

2018App. 1986) (stating that, as general rule, appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment when he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in trial court); Grays v. State, 291 S.W.3d 555, 557 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2009, no pet.) (“Typically, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment when he failed to object or otherwise raise the error in the trial court.” (citing Mercado, 718 S.W.3d at 296)).

2018App. 1986) (stating that, as general rule, appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment when he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in trial court); Grays v. State, 291 S.W.3d 555, 557 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2009, no pet.) (“Typically, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment when he failed to object or otherwise raise the error in the trial court.” (citing Mercado, 718 S.W.3d at 296)).

2012App. 1986) (―As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.‖); Davis v. State, 323 S.W.3d 190 , 195–96 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, pet. ref’d); Steadman v. State, 31 S.W.3d 738, 742 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, pet. ref’d); see also Moore v. State, 371 S.W.3d 221, 225 (Tex. 7 Crim.

2012App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Davis v. State , 323 S.W.3d 190 , 195–96 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, pet. ref’d); Steadman v. State , 31 S.W.3d 738, 742 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, pet. ref’d); see also Moore v. State , 371 S.W.3d 221, 225 (Tex. Crim.

2012App. 1986) (―As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.‖); Davis v. State, 323 S.W.3d 190 , 195–96 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, pet. ref’d); Steadman v. State, 31 S.W.3d 738, 742 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, pet. ref’d); see also Moore v. State, 371 S.W.3d 221, 225 (Tex. 7 Crim.

2012App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Davis v. State , 323 S.W.3d 190 , 195–96 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, pet. ref’d); Steadman v. State , 31 S.W.3d 738, 742 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, pet. ref’d); see also Moore v. State , 371 S.W.3d 221, 225 (Tex. Crim.

2023App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Prudhomme v. State, 47 S.W.3d 683, 690 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2001, pet. ref’d) (“Where a defendant elects at the beginning of trial to have the jury assess punishment, it is presumed that such defendant agreed at the end of trial for the court to assess punishment where . . . the court did so and no objection by either party appears in the record.” (citing Hackey v. State, 500 S.W.2d 520, 521 (Tex. Crim.

2023App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Prudhomme v. State, 47 S.W.3d 683, 690 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2001, pet. ref’d) (“Where a defendant elects at the beginning of trial to have the jury assess punishment, it is presumed that such defendant agreed at the end of trial for the court to assess punishment where . . . the court did so and no objection by either party appears in the record.” (citing Hackey v. State, 500 S.W.2d 520, 521 (Tex. Crim.

2022“A defendant is required to ‘present’ a motion to the trial court within ten days of filing it, unless the court, in its discretion, extends that time period.” Stokes v. State, 277 S.W.3d 20, 21 (Tex. Crim.

2020App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Means v. State, 347 S.W.3d 873, 874 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2011, no pet.) (defendant forfeited his complaint he should have been given community supervision instead of eight-year sentence because he did not present that complaint to trial court); Kim v. State, 283 S.W.3d 473, 475 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2009, pet. ref’d) (“Kim’s complaint about the alleged disproportionality of his sentence was not raised at the t

2019Cook v. State, 824 S.W.2d 634, 643 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d) (citing Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex. Crim.

2016“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.” Borders v. State, 822 S.W.2d 661, 666 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991) (citing Mercado, 718 S.W.2d at 296 ; TEX.

2012App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such 2 error in the trial court.”); Trevino v. State, 174 S.W.3d 925, 927-28 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2005, pet. ref‟d).

2010App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Timms v. State , Nos. 02-09-00306-CR, 02-09-00307-CR, 02-09-00308-CR, 02-09-00309-CR, 2010 WL 1509776, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Apr. 15, 2010, pet. filed); Kim , 283 S.W.3d at 475 ; Thompson v. State , 243 S.W.3d 774 , 775–76 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2007, pet. ref’d).

2009Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex.Crim.App.1986) (en banc); see also Hull v. State, 67 S.W.3d 215, 217-18 (Tex.Crim.App.2002); Harris v. State, 204 S.W.3d 19, 27 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, pet. ref'd). *558 However, an improper cumulation order is considered to be a void sentence, and such error cannot be waived.

2008App. 1986) (“As a general rule, an appellant may not assert error pertaining to his sentence or punishment where he failed to object or otherwise raise such error in the trial court.”); Jacoby v. State , 227 S.W.3d 128, 130 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, pet. ref’d) (concluding failing to specifically object to alleged disproportionate sentence in trial court or in post-trial motion waives any error for appeal).

2007Although Appellant agrees that he did not object to the sentence when it was pronounced and did not file a motion for new trial attacking the sentence, he asserts that “to the extent this complaint was not preserved, [A]ppellant asks the Court to address it in the interests of justice,” citing Butler v. State . 872 S.W.2d 227, 237 (Tex. Crim.

1991Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex.Crim.App.1986); Torres v. State, 751 S.W.2d 705, 708 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1988), pet. dism’d, improvidently granted, 785 S.W.2d 824 (Tex.Crim.App.1989).