Nicholas Darris Marshall v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Texas Court of Appeals for the First District affirmed Nicholas Darris Marshall’s conviction and 12-year sentence for possession of between 4 and 200 grams of methamphetamine. The court held that Marshall failed to preserve his Eighth Amendment proportionality challenge and, alternatively, concluded that the sentence was not grossly disproportionate because it fell within the statutory range.

Holdings

1. Marshall failed to preserve his complaint that his sentence was grossly disproportionate because he made no timely Eighth Amendment objection during the punishment hearing and did not raise the constitutional proportionality complaint in a motion for new trial.
2. Even if preserved, Marshall's twelve-year sentence was not grossly disproportionate to his offense and did not violate the Eighth Amendment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Marshall preserved for appellate review his claim that his twelve-year sentence was grossly disproportionate and violated the Eighth Amendment.
2. Whether, assuming preservation, Marshall's twelve-year sentence was grossly disproportionate to his offense and therefore constituted cruel and unusual punishment.

Disposition

affirmed