Sheldon McDaniel v. the State of Texas
10-21-00050-CR
| Tex. App. | Dec 1, 2021Background
- Sheldon McDaniel pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance (state jail felony), waived a jury, and entered a plea to the court without a state recommendation.
- The trial court ordered a pre-sentence investigation; McDaniel did not participate.
- After a punishment hearing, the court sentenced McDaniel to 20 months in a state jail facility; the written judgment did not include a finding about presumptive diligent-participation credit under article 42.0199.
- McDaniel filed a pro se notice of appeal the same day the judgment was entered but did not raise any constitutional challenge to articles 42.0199 or 42A.559 in the trial court or in a motion for new trial.
- On appeal McDaniel argued the statutory scheme requiring trial-court determinations of diligent-participation credit is facially unconstitutional under the Texas non-delegation doctrine.
- The court reviewed the constitutional question de novo but concluded the challenge was not preserved because it was not raised at trial; the judgment was affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the statutory requirement that trial courts determine eligibility for diligent-participation credit (arts. 42.0199 & 42A.559) is facially unconstitutional under Texas' non-delegation doctrine | McDaniel: statute impermissibly delegates legislative power; facially unconstitutional | State: statute presumed constitutional; McDaniel never raised the constitutional challenge in trial court so the claim is forfeited | Court: Challenge not preserved for appellate review; issue overruled; judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Ex parte Lo, 424 S.W.3d 10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (constitutional questions in criminal cases reviewed de novo)
- Karenev v. State, 281 S.W.3d 428 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (presumption of constitutionality and preservation requirements)
- Rodriguez v. State, 93 S.W.3d 60 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (legislature presumed neither arbitrary nor unreasonable)
- Ely v. State, 582 S.W.2d 416 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979) (courts should adopt reasonable constructions to preserve constitutionality)
- State v. Rosseau, 396 S.W.3d 550 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (burden on challenger to establish unconstitutionality; preservation of constitutional complaints at trial)