Thomas Lance Beloney v. State
06-15-00007-CR
| Tex. App. | Mar 12, 2015Background
- Appellant Thomas Lance Beloney pleaded guilty to enhanced Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) on Nov. 25, 2014; plea was open and taken by the 71st Judicial District Court, Harrison County, Texas.
- Enhancement based on prior convictions elevated the offense to a second-degree felony (punishment range 2–20 years).
- The State introduced certified prior judgments and family witnesses; proof showed appellant previously caused a vehicular manslaughter and continued to drink after release from Louisiana custody.
- Appellant testified he is an alcoholic, had limited prior treatment, was paroled early from a vehicular manslaughter sentence (without inpatient rehab), and sought sentence placement in a rehabilitation program.
- The trial court found drugs/alcohol were contributing factors and sentenced Beloney to 18 years imprisonment; no contemporaneous objection or motion for new trial/arrest of judgment was filed.
- Appellate counsel filed an Anders-style brief and a motion to withdraw, arguing no non-frivolous issue exists and that the Eighth Amendment disproportionality challenge is not preserved and fails on the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 18-year sentence is grossly disproportionate (Eighth Amendment) | Beloney argues sentence is excessive given facts and rehabilitative need | State argues sentence is within statutory range and justified by criminal history and public safety concerns | Court (via counsel) concludes issue not preserved; on merits, 18-year sentence within statutory range and not grossly disproportionate |
| Whether error was preserved for appeal | Beloney (implicitly) asserts appellate review should consider constitutional challenge | State/record: trial counsel made no objection and filed no post-trial motions | Preservation: waived — failure to object or move for new trial/arrest results in waiver under Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a) |
Key Cases Cited
- Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277 (1983) (establishes proportionality review framework comparing gravity of offense to sentence)
- Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (1991) (limits proportionality review; requires initial comparison before considering other factors)
- McGruder v. Puckett, 954 F.2d 313 (5th Cir.) (1992) (discusses proportionality analysis in the Fifth Circuit)
- Jordan v. State, 495 S.W.2d 949 (Tex. Crim. App. 1973) (holds sentences within statutory range generally not cruel and unusual)
- Winchester v. State, 246 S.W.3d 386 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2008) (addresses federal proportionality review for state sentences)