Juan Caudana v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 167th District Court of Travis County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-01-00237-CR Juan Caudana, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 167TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 006722, HONORABLE MICHAEL LYNCH, JUDGE PRESIDING A jury found appellant Juan Caudana guilty of multiple counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child, indecency with a child by contact, and indecency with a child by exposure. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. ยงยง 21.11, 22.021 (West Supp. 2002). In his sole point of error, appellant contends the sixty-five-year term of imprisonment imposed by the jury for the aggravated sexual assaults is grossly disproportionate to the offenses. We will affirm. The Eighth Amendment has been held to prohibit punishments that are grossly disproportionate to the offense. U.S. Const. amend. VIII; Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277, 287 (1983); Hutto v. Finney, 437 U.S. 678, 685 (1978). Under the Supreme Court s disproportionality analysis, we must consider the gravity of the offense and the harshness of the penalty, the sentences imposed on other criminals in the same jurisdiction, and the sentences imposed for the commission of the same crime in other jurisdictions. Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. at 292; see McGruder v. Puckett, 954 F.2d 313, 316 (5th Cir. 1992) (reviewing Solem v. Helm and Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (1991)). The evidence in this cause shows that appellant sexually assaulted his stepdaughter repeatedly over a three-year period, sometimes at knifepoint. He threatened to kill her and her family if she disclosed his acts. Appellant had previous convictions for physically assaultive behavior. Given this evidence, we do not believe that the punishment imposed by the jury is grossly disproportionate to the offenses. Further, the record contains no information by which we could compare appellant s sentence to sentences for similar offenses in Travis County or other jurisdictions. The point of error is overruled. The district court prepared separate judgments for each count. The judgments are affirmed. __________________________________________ Marilyn Aboussie, Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices B. A. Smith and Puryear Affirmed Filed: February 22, 2002 Do Not Publish 2
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.
