Rodriguez v. State

Full title: ARTURO RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas

Date published: Oct 18, 2005

No. 05-04-01600-CR (Tex. App. Oct. 18, 2005)

Opinion

No. 05-04-01600-CR

Opinion issued October 18, 2005. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.

On Appeal from the 204^th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F03-56562-NQ. Affirmed.

Before Justices MORRIS, WRIGHT, and RICHTER.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Opinion By Justice MORRIS.

In this case, a jury convicted Arturo Rodriguez of aggravated assault. The trial court assessed punishment at ten years' imprisonment. In a single issue, appellant contends the trial court failed to pronounce sentence in his presence. We affirm the trial court's judgment. The background of the case and the evidence adduced at trial are well known to the parties, and therefore we limit recitation of the facts. We issue this memorandum opinion pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1 because the law to be applied in the case is well settled. In his sole issue on appeal, appellant complains the trial judge did not pronounce sentence in his presence in violation of article 42.03, section 1(a) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. Article 42.03, section 1(a) requires that the sentence in felony cases be pronounced in the defendant's presence. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.03 § 1(a) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05). In assessing punishment, the judge said, "I'm assessing punishment at ten years confinement . . . I will allow you credit for any time you have been incarcerated." Appellant now complains the trial judge failed to order that his punishment be carried into execution in a manner prescribed by law. But he did not complain about the manner in which the trial judge pronounced sentence either at the time the sentence was imposed or in his motion for new trial. See Tex.R.App.P. 33.1(a)(1). Thus, he has not preserved his complaint for review. Moreover, the judgment shows the sentence started the same day it was pronounced. No set formula is required for the judge to pronounce sentence. We conclude the trial court complied with article 42.03, section 1. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.03 § 1(a). We resolve appellant's sole issue against him. We affirm the trial court's judgment.