Sergio Fonza-Carey v. The State of Texas Appeal from 188th District Court of Gregg County (memorandum opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana No. 06-15-00201-CR SERGIO FONZA-CAREY, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 188th District Court Gregg County, Texas Trial Court No. 43866-A Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley MEMORANDUM OPINION Pursuant to an open plea, the trial court found Sergio Fonza-Carey guilty of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon.1 After a trial to the bench, the trial court imposed the minimum sentence of two years’ imprisonment.2 On appeal, Fonza-Carey complains that the punishment imposed violates the prohibition against disproportionate sentences under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. To preserve a complaint for appellate review, Fonza-Carey must have presented to the trial court a timely request, objection, or motion that stated the specific grounds for his desired ruling, or the complaint must be apparent from the context. See TEX. R. APP. P. 33.1(a)(1); Hookie v. State, 136 S.W.3d 671, 679–80 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2004, no pet.). We have previously held that to preserve a disproportionate sentence complaint on appeal, a defendant must either object at the time the sentence is imposed, or assert the complaint in a timely filed motion for new trial. See Mullins v. State, 208 S.W.3d 469, 470 n.2 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2006, no pet.); Hookie, 136 S.W.3d at 680; Jackson v. State, 989 S.W.2d 842, 845 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1999, no pet.). Our review of the record shows that this complaint was not presented to the trial court.3 Therefore, Fonza-Carey’s sole complaint on appeal has not been preserved for our review. 1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 46.04(a), (c) (West 2011). 2 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 12.34(a) (West 2011). 3 Fonza-Carey made no objection when his sentence was imposed. Although he filed a generalized motion for new trial, the motion did not raise the issue of a grossly disproportionate sentence or assert a violation of the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 2 We affirm the judgment. Bailey C. Moseley Justice Date Submitted: Date Decided: August 19, 2016 August 22, 2016 Do Not Publish 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
