Opinion
Nos. 05-05-00253-CR, 05-05-00256-CR, 05-05-00254-CR, 05-05-00257-CR, 05-05-00255-CR, 05-05-00258-CR
Opinion Filed November 18, 2005. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause Nos. F04-27434-RI, F04-35857-QI, F04-35858-QI, F04-43921-PI, F02-49609-UI, F02-72960-Li Affirm.
Before Justices O'NEILL, FITZGERALD, and LANG.
OPINION
Tarra Denea Watkins waived a jury trial and entered non-negotiated guilty pleas to four forgery offenses, one making a false statement to obtain property or credit offense, and one tampering with a government record offense. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. §§ 32.21, 32.32, 37.10 (Vernon 2003 Supp. 2005). The trial court sentenced appellant to twenty-four months in a state jail facility for each offense. In a single issue, appellant contends the trial court abused its discretion in assessing an unreasonable sentence. We affirm the trial court's judgments. Appellant argues the trial court abused its discretion because the length of her sentence in these cases is grossly disproportionate to the offenses. Appellant asserts the extraordinary hardships on her and her family, due to her twin daughters' illness of spina bifida and her brother's terminal cancer, should have mitigated the punishment. The State responds that appellant has not preserved her complaint and, alternatively, the trial court properly exercised its discretion in assessing appellant's sentences. We agree that the complaint is not preserved. Appellant did not complain about her sentences either at the time they were imposed or in her motions 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.). Even constitutional rights, including the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, may be waived. Rhoades v. State, 934 S.W.2d 113, 120 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996); Castaneda, 135 S.W.3d at 723. Moreover, the twenty-four-month sentences are within the statutory punishment range. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 12.35 (Vernon 2003); Kirk v. State, 949 S.W.2d 769, 772 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1997, pet. ref'd). We resolve her sole issue against her. The trial court's judgment in each case is affirmed.