Christopher Cotten v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 124th District Court of Gregg County

In The
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
______________________________
No. 06-07-00119-CR
______________________________
CHRISTOPHER DEWAYNE COTTEN, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 124th Judicial District Court
Gregg County, Texas
Trial Court No. 34447-B
Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carter
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Christopher Dewayne Cotten appeals from his conviction on his open plea of guilty to the third-degree felony offense of possession of a controlled substance. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. 481.115(c) (Vernon 2003). Cotten was sentenced by the trial court to seven years' imprisonment.

On appeal, Cotten raises one point of error, contending the sentence should be set aside and remanded for a new trial on punishment due to factual insufficiency of the evidence during the punishment phase of his trial, citing as authority the case of Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979). Cotten states specifically in his appellate brief that he "does not rely on a 'proportionality' approach under the Eighth Amendment."

A review of the evidence for factual sufficiency is inappropriate with respect to the assessment of punishment. See Bradfield v. State, 42 S.W.3d 350, 351 (Tex. App.--Eastland 2001, pet. ref'd); Kanouse v. State, 958 S.W.2d 509, 510 (Tex. App.--Beaumont 1998, no pet.); Flores v. State, 936 S.W.2d 478, 479 (Tex. App.--Eastland 1996, pet. ref'd). Therefore, we decline to conduct a factual sufficiency review of the evidence on punishment. See Smith v. State, Nos. 14-06-00829-CR, 14-06-00830-CR, 14-06-00831-CR, 14-06-00832-CR, 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 9203 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] Nov. 20, 2007, no pet. h.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).

Cotten also alleges that his right to Due Course of Law, Article I, Section 19, of the Texas Constitution, has been violated, but cites no authority or argument. Therefore, he has waived this complaint and we will not address it. Brumit v. State, 206 S.W.3d 639, 646 n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).

There being no other issues before us, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

 

Jack Carter

Justice

 

Date Submitted: December 18, 2007

Date Decided: December 31, 2007

 

Do Not Publish