COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 2-09-040-CR
TIMOTHY E. LONG APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE
------------
FROM THE 213TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY
------------
MEMORANDUM OPINION 1
------------
A jury convicted Appellant Timothy E. Long of aggravated sexual assault
of a child under age fourteen and indecency with a child by contact. See Tex.
Penal Code Ann. § 21.11(a)(1) (Vernon 2003), § 22.021(a)(2)(B) (Vernon
Supp. 2008). Long pleaded true to the sexual offender notice enhancement
allegation in the indictment, and the trial court sentenced him to life
1
… See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
imprisonment for the aggravated sexual assault offense and thirty-five years’
confinement for the indecency offense. In a single issue, Long argues that the
State’s attorney made improper jury argument at the guilt phase that
substantially prejudiced his right to a fair trial. Specifically, he complains that
the following argument made by the State’s attorney was intended to create
a false impression in the minds of the jury and amounted to a comment on his
decision not to testify:
Now, Defense Counsel chose to put on a case. She chose to put
on the forensic interviewer. And who she didn’t call, was she did
not show you anyone who could come up here - - no family
member who could come up here and say he was a good man.
You didn’t hear anybody come up here and say he was incapable
of doing this.
Long concedes that defense counsel did not lodge an objection to the
complained-of argument, but he argues that the jury argument amounted to
plain error. It is well established that when a defendant fails to object to a jury
argument or fails to pursue an objection to a jury argument to an adverse ruling,
he forfeits his right to complain about the argument on appeal. See Cockrell v.
State, 933 S.W.2d 73, 89 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S.
1173 (1997); see also Threadgill v. State, 146 S.W.3d 654, 670 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2004) (reaffirming Cockrell); Ladd v. State, 3 S.W.3d 547, 569–70 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1999), cert. denied, 529 U.S. 1070 (2000); Rousseau v. State,
2
Nos. 11-07-00157-CR, 11-07-00158-CR, 2009 WL 141857, at *2 (Tex.
App.—Eastland Jan. 22, 2009, pet. filed) (mem. op., not designated for
publication) (applying Cockrell in appeal from convictions for aggravated sexual
assault and indecency with a child). Because Long did not object to the State’s
argument, he failed to preserve this issue for appellate review. See Cockrell,
933 S.W.2d at 89. We overrule Long’s sole issue and affirm the trial court’s
judgment.
PER CURIAM
PANEL: MEIER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.
DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
DELIVERED: August 20, 2009
3