No. 05-10-01434-CR
Opinion Filed September 28, 2011. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex. R. App. P. 47.
On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F10-54552-T.
Before Justices MORRIS, O'NEILL, and FILLMORE.
Opinion By Justice FILLMORE.
Kayla Janelle Monroe appeals her conviction for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon. In a single issue, Monroe contends the trial court abused its discretion by sentencing her to imprisonment, as opposed to probation, because the punishment violates the objectives of the penal code. We affirm the trial court's judgment. The background of the case and the evidence admitted at trial are well known to the parties, and we therefore limit recitation of the facts. We issue this memorandum opinion pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.4 because the law to be applied in the case is well settled.
Background
On July 29, 2010, Monroe waived a jury and pleaded guilty to aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, a firearm. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 29.02(a)(2), 29.03(a)(2) (West 2011). On October 22, 2010, after finding Monroe guilty, the trial court assessed punishment at twenty years' imprisonment. Monroe timely filed a motion for new trial on November 9, 2010. In the motion, Monroe contended the trial court abused its discretion and violated the objectives of the penal code by imposing a prison sentence. The trial court denied the motion on November 12, 2010. Monroe timely filed her notice of appeal. Applicable Law
An appellate court reviews a trial court's decision as to punishment under an abuse of discretion standard. See Jackson v. State, 680 S.W.2d 809, 814 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984). As long as a sentence is within the range of punishment prescribed by the legislature in a valid statute, the punishment is not excessive nor is it an abuse of discretion, and therefore should not be overturned on appeal. See id; Castaneda v. State, 135 S.W.3d 719, 724 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2003, no pet.). Monroe was convicted of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, a first-degree felony offense. The range of punishment for a first-degree felony is from five-to-ninety-nine years or life imprisonment, and with an optional fine not to exceed $10,000. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.32. As long as there is some evidence in the record to support the punishment decision the trial court made, the decision should not be overturned. See Jackson, 680 S.W.2d at 814 (holding trial court abuses discretion when there is no evidence of offense or for punishment, no information about defendant, and no plea bargain). Discussion
Monroe contends the trial court abused its discretion because the twenty-year prison sentence violates the objectives of the penal code. Monroe asserts there is nothing in the record to show she is beyond redemption or could not be rehabilitated. While Monroe concedes the sentence is within the statutory punishment range for the offense, she argues the trial court had less severe and more appropriate options available, such as deferred adjudication probation. Monroe argues she needed treatment for her longstanding drug addiction instead of punishment that is merely punitive and does not further the rehabilitative goals of the penal code. The State responds that the record does not show the sentence violates the objectives of the penal code because the sentence is within the statutory punishment range. The trial court had sufficient evidence upon which to base its ruling. See Jackson, 680 S.W.2d at 814. The trial court heard testimony from several witnesses, including testimony from the complainant, that Monroe placed a loaded gun against the complainant's face and demanded the complainant's car. The trial court also heard testimony from Monroe and several of her relatives about Monroe's drug addiction, her regular attendance at church, and her pledge to change her life. It was the trial court's role, as fact-finder in this case, to reconcile any conflicts in the evidence and judge the witnesses' credibility. See Swearingen v. State, 101 S.W.3d 89, 97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003); Lee v. State, 952 S.W.2d 894, 897 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1997, no pet.) (en banc). Moreover, the twenty-year sentence imposed is well within the statutory range of punishment for a first-degree felony, as Monroe concedes. Thus, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by sentencing Monroe to twenty years' imprisonment. We resolve Monroe's sole issue against her. We affirm the trial court's judgment.