Dan William Reynolds III v. State
2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 3526
| Tex. App. | 2014Background
- Dan William Reynolds III pleaded guilty to 80 counts of possession of child pornography and elected the trial court to assess punishment.
- The court admonished Reynolds that each count was a third-degree felony punishable by 2–10 years and that sentences could run consecutively; Reynolds acknowledged understanding and proceeded.
- Trial evidence (PSI and witness testimony) showed Reynolds possessed over 12,000 images, retained over 1,000 images of one victim, communicated with minors online, kept hidden post-office boxes and computers, traveled to a victim’s state, and maintained child‑oriented items; he had been caught with similar material six years earlier.
- Defense presented a risk assessment by Dr. Ferrara concluding Reynolds posed a low risk to reoffend and could likely complete treatment; the State emphasized aggravating facts undermining that assessment.
- The trial court sentenced Reynolds to 10 years on each count, ordering 72 counts concurrent and 8 counts consecutive, resulting in an aggregate term of 80 years.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the aggregate 80‑year sentence is cruel and unusual as grossly disproportionate under the Eighth Amendment | Reynolds: aggregate punishment (80 years) is grossly disproportionate to his offenses | State: sentences were within statutory ranges and consecutive sentencing was authorized; proportionality claim was preserved and meritless | Court: preserved; sentence not grossly disproportionate and therefore not cruel and unusual — judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277 (Eighth Amendment proportionality framework)
- Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (limits and qualification of Solem test)
- McGruder v. Puckett, 954 F.2d 313 (Fifth Circuit approach retaining disproportionality review post‑Harmelin)
- Ex parte Chavez, 213 S.W.3d 320 (Texas recognition of gross‑disproportionality exception)
- Smith v. State, 256 S.W.3d 341 (San Antonio Court of Appeals discussion applying narrowed disproportionality analysis)