Jones, Keith Dwayne
PD-0917-15
| Tex. | Jul 22, 2015Background
- Keith Dwayne Jones pleaded guilty to two separate aggravated-robbery indictments; the trial court sentenced him to concurrent 25-year terms.
- He appealed, arguing (1) the sentences were grossly disproportionate (cruel and unusual) and (2) the trial court violated his statutory right to allocution under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 42.07 by failing to ask whether he had anything to say before pronouncing sentence.
- At the punishment hearing Jones spoke to the court (expressing rehabilitation, religious conversion, GED completion) after defense closing argument; the court asked if he had anything else and counsel said no. The court then pronounced sentence.
- Jones did not object at trial to the sentences on Eighth Amendment or state-cruel-and-unusual grounds, nor did he object to the court’s alleged failure to comply with the allocution statute. No motion for new trial was filed.
- The Fourteenth Court of Appeals concluded Jones waived his complaints by failing to preserve error and affirmed both judgments.
Issues
| Issue | Jones's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 25-year sentences are grossly disproportionate/cruel and unusual | Sentences are excessive and disproportionate to the crimes | Jones failed to preserve the claim by not objecting at trial or filing a motion for new trial | Waived for appeal; issue overruled; convictions affirmed |
| Whether trial court violated article 42.07 by not asking if Jones had anything to say before sentencing (allocution) | The court’s failure to ask denied his statutory/fundamental right to allocution; either allocution is absolute or requires express waiver; he had no realistic opportunity to object after sentencing | Allocution was effectively afforded (Jones spoke), and Jones failed to preserve complaint by not objecting at trial; allocution can be waived | Waived for appeal; issue overruled; convictions affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Marin v. State, 851 S.W.2d 275 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) (discusses allocution and waiver principles)
- Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277 (U.S. 1983) (Eighth Amendment proportionality principle)
- McClintick v. State, 508 S.W.2d 616 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974) (allocution claim waived if not timely raised)
- Rhoades v. State, 934 S.W.2d 113 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (preservation rule for sentencing complaints)
- Nicolas v. State, 56 S.W.3d 760 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 2001) (sentencing/constitutional claims may be waived without timely objection)