JOHN DOUGLAS REED, JR., Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

AFFIRM and Opinion Filed April 29, 2009
 
 
 
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
............................
No. 05-08-01282-CR
............................
JOHN DOUGLAS REED, JR., Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
.............................................................
On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F06-89278-XR
.............................................................
OPINION
Before Justices Moseley, O'Neill, and Murphy
Opinion By Justice Murphy
        John Douglas Reed, Jr. waived a jury and pleaded guilty to sexual assault of a child. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.011(a)(2) (Vernon 2003). The trial court assessed punishment at ten years' imprisonment and a $5000 fine. In a single point of error, appellant contends the trial court abused its discretion by sentencing him to prison. We affirm.
        Appellant argues the punishment assessed by the trial court violates the objectives of the penal code because it is not necessary to prevent a likely recurrence of his criminal behavior, and he could be successfully rehabilitated through probation and education. Appellant asserts the evidence shows he expressed remorse and regret and stated he would not have “touched” the complainant had he known her true age. The State responds that appellant has failed to preserve his complaint for appellate review and, alternatively, the record does not support his claim.
        Appellant did not complain about the sentence either at the time it was imposed or in a motion for new trial. See Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a)(1); Castaneda v. State, 135 S.W.3d 719, 723 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2003, no pet.). Moreover, the trial court imposed punishment within the statutory range for the offense. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 12.33 (Vernon 2003); Kirk v. State, 949 S.W.2d 769, 772 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1997, pet. ref'd). We conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in assessing the ten-year prison term. See Jackson v. State, 680 S.W.2d 809, 814 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984). We overrule appellant's sole point of error.
        We affirm the trial court's judgment.
 
 
 
                                                          
                                                          MARY MURPHY
                                                          JUSTICE
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47
081282F.U05