Opinion
Nos. 05-04-01677-CR, 05-04-01678-CR
Opinion Filed July 25, 2005. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.
On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause Nos. F99-01522-Rnmw, F00-71259-Tmw. Affirmed.
Before Justices WHITTINGTON, MOSELEY, and LANG-MIERS.
OPINION
Jeremy Douglas Nowlin waived a jury trial and entered a negotiated guilty plea to securing execution of a document by deception valued at $200,000 or more and a negotiated nolo contendere plea to aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 22.02(a), 32.46(a), (b)(7) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05). In the document case, the trial court sentenced appellant to ten years' confinement, probated for ten years, and assessed a $1000 fine. In the aggravated assault case, the judge deferred adjudicating guilt, placed appellant on five years' community supervision, and assessed a $100 fine. The State moved to revoke appellant's community supervision in the document case and to adjudicate guilt in the aggravated assault case, alleging appellant violated the terms and conditions of his community supervision. The trial court found the allegations true, revoked appellant's community supervision in the document case, sentenced him to five years' confinement, and assessed a fine of $915.25. In the aggravated assault case, the trial court found the allegations true, adjudicated appellant guilty, and assessed punishment at fifteen years' confinement and a fine of $1.75. In two points of error, appellant contends the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing him to imprisonment because he suffers from HIV and complications from his illness prevented him from reporting or paying the fees. The State responds that appellant has not preserved his complaint, and, alternatively, that the sentences are within the statutory punishment range for the offenses. We agree that the complaint is not preserved. Appellant did not complain about the sentences, either at the time they was imposed or in a motion for new trial. See Tex.R.App.P. 33.1(a)(1); Castaneda v. State, 135 S.W.3d 719, 723 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2003, no pet.). Therefore, appellant has not preserved his complaints for review. We overrule appellant's points of error. We affirm the trial court's judgment in each case.