Robert James Martin III v. State, 01-15-00709-CR

Robert James Martin III pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated robbery and one count of evading arrest in a vehicle; punishment was to be assessed by the trial court.
The State presented evidence of three convenience-store armed robberies (two in Pearland, one in Harris County), surveillance images, a handprint identification, cellphone photos of Martin with a firearm and money, and testimony about a high-speed vehicle flight that caused an accident.
Victims and witnesses testified about threats with a firearm, money taken from a register, and an incident in which an eight‑year‑old was struck on the head with a firearm.
Martin was 17 at the time of the offenses, had no prior record, and presented character evidence and mitigation at punishment; he emphasized use of an unloaded firearm.
The trial court sentenced Martin to 40 years for each aggravated robbery count and 10 years for evading arrest, all concurrent. Martin did not object when sentence was pronounced.
Martin filed a motion for new trial alleging ineffective advice re: plea and failure to seek deferred adjudication; he did not assert at trial or in the motion that the sentence was cruel, unusual, or grossly disproportionate.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Martin's 40‑year sentences were grossly disproportional/cruel and unusual	Martin contended sentence was grossly disproportional and unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment	State argued Martin waived challenge by failing to object at sentencing or raise the issue in the motion for new trial; sentences within statutory ranges	Court held Martin waived the Eighth Amendment challenge for failure to object; sentences within statutory ranges so not fundamental error; issue overruled

Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277 (Eighth Amendment requires proportionality between crime and sentence)
Noland v. State, 264 S.W.3d 144 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007) (failure to preserve Eighth Amendment complaint)
Wynn v. State, 219 S.W.3d 54 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006) (failure to object waives cruel-and-unusual claim)
Solis v. State, 945 S.W.2d 300 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1997) (Eighth Amendment claim cannot be raised first on appeal)
Perez v. State, 464 S.W.3d 34 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2016) (failure to object waives constitutional complaint)
Clark v. State, 365 S.W.3d 333 (Tex. Crim. App.) (same)
Sample v. State, 405 S.W.3d 295 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2013) (general expressions of shock insufficient to preserve Eighth Amendment claim)
Young v. State, 425 S.W.3d 469 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2012) (sentence within statutory range not fundamental error)
Trevino v. State, 174 S.W.3d 925 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2005) (sentence within statutory range does not automatically give rise to cruel-and-unusual fundamental error)