From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Conner v. State

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL B
Jan 30, 2012
NO. 07-11-0165-CR (Tex. App. Jan. 30, 2012)

Summary

declining to ignore holdings of Court of Criminal Appeals regarding preserving error of improper jury argument and apply federal "plain error" doctrine

Summary of this case from Riordan v. State

Opinion

NO. 07-11-0165-CR

01-30-2012

COREY CONNER, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


FROM THE 364TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY; NO. 2010-426,098; HONORABLE BRADLEY S. UNDERWOOD, PRESIDING

Memorandum Opinion

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Appellant Corey Conner challenges his conviction of murder by contending the State improperly bolstered and vouched for the credibility of its witnesses during closing argument. We affirm the judgment because the complaint was not preserved for appeal.

Error pertaining to jury argument is waived by the failure to make a timely and proper objection. Estrada v. State, 313 S.W.3d 274, 303 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010), cert. denied, __ U.S. _, 131 S.Ct. 905, 178 L.Ed.2d 760 (2011); Miles v. State, 312 S.W.3d 909, 911 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, pet. ref'd); Lange v. State, 57 S.W.3d 458, 467 (Tex. App.-Amarillo 2002, pet. ref'd). Moreover, the grounds underlying any objection uttered at trial must comport with those asserted on appeal. Pena v. State, 285 S.W.3d 459, 464 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). Because appellant did not object to some of the comments in question and the objection raised regarding others failed to comport with his complaint on appeal, the purported errors were not preserved for review.Appellant concedes as much but nonetheless asks us to deem the complaint "plain error" under United States v. Gracia, 522 F.3d 597 (5th Cir. 2008) and dispense with the preservation requirement. To do that, however, would be to ignore holdings of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals akin to that in Estrada. We may not do that. Instead, we invite appellant to propose his request for a new standard of review to the Court of Criminal Appeals.

At one point, appellant objected to the prosecutor's reference to the statements purportedly made by individuals who did not testify. When the prosecutor explained that he was only referring to the fact that statements were taken and not to their content, appellant responded, "[t]hat's fine." The court then overruled the objection.

Accordingly, the issue is overruled, and the judgment is affirmed.

Brian Quinn

Chief Justice
Do not publish.


Summaries of

Conner v. State

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL B
Jan 30, 2012
NO. 07-11-0165-CR (Tex. App. Jan. 30, 2012)

declining to ignore holdings of Court of Criminal Appeals regarding preserving error of improper jury argument and apply federal "plain error" doctrine

Summary of this case from Riordan v. State
Case details for

Conner v. State

Case Details

Full title:COREY CONNER, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL B

Date published: Jan 30, 2012

Citations

NO. 07-11-0165-CR (Tex. App. Jan. 30, 2012)

Citing Cases

Riordan v. State

We decline to depart—and indeed, as an intermediate appellate court, may not depart—from the binding…

Exezidis v. State

We decline to adopt a standard of review for ineffective-assistance claims that varies from the abuse of…