Do you know the impact if you don’t preserve error in trial? In the above video, you’ll find Mr. Larry Pearson Jr. of Lubbock, Texas who just spit on that cop. He didn’t know it at the time, but he’ll get 70 years in prison for what he just did.
To put that into perspective, 70 years ago was 1954. In 1954, gas was 0.29 cents a gallon, the drip coffee maker was just invented, Hawaii and Alaska weren’t even states yet, and the Korean war had just ended.
Have you ever wondered just how crucial precise legal language and specific objections are in court?
Imagine facing that 70-year prison sentence and finding out (too late) that a technicality prevents you from challenging it on appeal for failure to make a very specific objection.
Today, we’re diving into Mr. Pearson’s case to uncover exactly how critical it is to know and apply these legal nuances, especially if you’re considering representing yourself.
The Conviction of Mr. Pearson
Mr. Pearson was prosecuted for harassment of a public servant, after he spat on police officers during an investigation for family violence.
However, despite harassment of a public servant having a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, Mr. Pearson was sentenced to an astonishing 70 years.
That’s right. 70 years for spitting on a police officer.
The severity of this sentence raises eyebrows, but it’s the legal battles that followed which provide crucial lessons on the importance of specific legal arguments in trial and appeals. Mr. Pearson’s case highlights just how important it is to preserve error so that you can complain about it on appeal.
What went wrong
As you can see, Mr. Pearson was involved in a high-tension incident with law enforcement, during which he was accused of spitting at officers and resisting arrest.
At trial, the prosecution presented this video evidence and the testimony of the officers involved, painting Pearson as a habitual offender, which significantly impacted the harshness of his sentence. You see, Mr. Pearson had previously been convicted of 2 other felonies.
Mr. Pearson filed an Appeal, where he challenged the severity of his sentence, arguing it was grossly disproportionate and thus violated the Eighth Amendment.
The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, and excessive prison sentences have been deemed cruel and unusual.
However, here’s where the root of our discussion lies: the appellate court determined that Mr. Pearson was prohibited from arguing that his punishment violated the Eighth Amendment because of something that he didn’t do at trial. He didn’t preserve error for appellate review.
Why it matters to preserve error
In order to complain about an error in the trial court on appeal, you must first make your objection to the trial court for most issues.
Think of it this way: If you’re complaining that a mistake was made by the trial court, you must first give the trial court an opportunity to fix their mistake.
This is how you “preserve error.”
We’ll cover the ways that you can preserve error if you’re representing yourself here in a minute.
Mr. Pearson made some objections to the trial court, but they were very broad complaints about the law and evidence.
Mr. Pearson made no specific objections about the punishment being excessive, cruel or unusual, or a violation of his Eighth Amendment rights.
This procedural oversight meant that the appellate court would not consider whether his sentence was constitutionally excessive.
Whether or not he would have won on an Eighth Amendment argument is debatable since the range of punishment for Mr. Pearson was a minimum of 25 years and a maximum of 99 years.
This is where it is important for you to know all of the technical legal jargon so that way you can preserve error for appeal if you’re representing yourself.
How to Properly Preserve Error
As you can see, knowing how to properly preserve error doesn’t just mean the difference between winning and losing, but it also means getting the opportunity to determine whether you win or lose. Here are your 3 key points to success:
Understand Legal Standards: Knowing the standards that apply, like those under the Eighth Amendment for cruel and unusual punishment, is crucial.
However, this applies to far more than just excessive punishment objections. Sometimes, the evidence that is offered at trial is inadmissible because it violates a Rule of Evidence.
This knowledge enables you to frame your objections and arguments clearly to address these points.
Be Specific: When raising objections at trial, specificity is key. It’s not enough to claim that a sentence is unfair; you must articulate how it violates specific legal standards or constitutional rights.
If the evidence is inadmissible because it violates a rule of evidence, it isn’t enough for you to simply say that it violates the rules.
You should specifically point to which rule of evidence that your objection is based on if you want to preserve error for appeal.
Make a Clear Record: Ensure that every objection and its basis are well-documented in the trial record. Appeals are based on the record, and without a clear indication of your objections, the higher courts will not consider them.
This means that if you’re standing in Court, ensure that you have clearly articulated your objections so the Court Reporter can take them down, and then make sure that the Judge actually makes a ruling on your objection.
If you realize after your trial that you didn’t make an objection that you should have made, then you should include it in your Motion for New Trial.
The written record is still part of the record, but you still need to bring it to the Court’s attention and get a ruling on the Motion.
Even if you do all of these things correctly, that doesn’t guarantee that you’ll win, but it will guarantee that you at least get the opportunity to ask the Court of Appeals to determine whether or not you should have won.
Lessons you should learn
Mr. Pearson’s case is a dangerous reminder of the complexities of legal procedures and the importance of articulating specific legal arguments.
Mr. Pearson was represented by an attorney, yet even the attorney didn’t make the objections required by the Court of Appeals to preserve error.
It might be easy to just blame the attorney for not making the objection, but most importantly, it underscores just how technically precise your objections and motions must be in order to preserve error.
Whether you choose to represent yourself or work with an attorney, understanding these fundamentals is key to advocating effectively for your rights.
If you do decide to represent yourself, there are a few key things you need to know about evidence, testimony, and objections.
–Authored by Matthew L. Harris, Esq.,
Matthew Harris Law, PLLC – Civil Litigation Division
1101 Broadway, Lubbock, Texas, 79401-3303
Tel: (806) 702-4852 | Fax: (800) 985-9479